Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 19:16 UTC, submitted by DigitalDame
Windows "With today's release of the Windows Vista February CTP, Microsoft has publicly passed a key milestone on the road to launching its new operating system. This release of Vista is 'feature-complete', the company says, meaning that all of the fundamental capabilities that Vista will eventually offer are now baked in." Lots of screenshots included, so go ahead and praise halleluja or declare end of days, boys and girls.
Order by: Score:
Feature complete
by hfarberg on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 19:42 UTC
hfarberg
Member since:
2005-07-06

The thing that interests me most with this is the fact that it is 'feature complete'. Hopefully this release is pretty good, so Microsoft only has to iron out the last wrinkles before Vista is released later this year/early next year

Wish I was a registered beta tester or msdn/technet subscriber.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Feature complete
by pr0c on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 19:47 UTC in reply to "Feature complete"
pr0c Member since:
2005-07-06

I am a MSDN subscriber (universal / Visual Studio Team Suite) and I do not see a new copy of Vista... the latest build is December. I wonder how/why they got an early beta...

Edited 2006-02-22 19:49

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Feature complete
by jayson.knight on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 00:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Feature complete"
jayson.knight Member since:
2005-07-06

MSDN does content releases on either Tuesdays or Thursdays, but more than likely for this they'll have it up within the next couple of days. More than likely this build is about a week old, and they had it the hands of PCMag the second they stamped this build as the February CTP thus giving them some time to play around with it. As to why they would get an early beta? MS ships early betas to A) anyone of noteriaty who will review it and give them some fanfare, and B) all of their largest customers long before we lowly MSDN folks get them :-).

Reply Score: 1

v RE: Feature complete
by Shannara on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 23:45 UTC in reply to "Feature complete"
v Pretty fair forgery...
by nmi! on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 19:50 UTC
RE: Pretty fair forgery...
by Tom K on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 19:56 UTC in reply to "Pretty fair forgery..."
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

That joke is getting old ...

And it was never funny to start with.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Pretty fair forgery...
by yanik on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:05 UTC in reply to "Pretty fair forgery..."
yanik Member since:
2005-07-13

How much did Microsoft pay Apple for the OSX license?

hehe, I was thinking the same thing, looks likes a OSX/gnome

Reply Score: 1

v RE[2]: Pretty fair forgery...
by linuxh8r on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:06 UTC in reply to "Pretty fair forgery..."
RE[3]: Pretty fair forgery...
by situation on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Pretty fair forgery..."
situation Member since:
2006-01-10

T-t-t-t-rollllll.
Why can't everyone just get along? Borrowing / stealing of ideas happens all the time. In the end, it makes a better product, as I'm sure we can agree. And truth be told, most users just care about the end product, not who stole what interface in what year and under what circumstances.

Reply Score: 3

Computer Rating
by vondur on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 19:52 UTC
vondur
Member since:
2005-07-07

I had to laugh at the computer rating screenshot. A 2.8 P4 w/2 gigs of ram and a GForce 5200 128MB only scored a 2!(I assume out of 10, but even if 5 is still sad) Although that is not a top of the line machine, it seems to me to be adequate for most general comptuer work. I wonder how it performs with all of the graphic goodies, but I believe that MS lets you disable the eyecandy for slower machines.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Computer Rating
by Tom K on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 19:57 UTC in reply to "Computer Rating"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

The GeForce 5200 is what is holding it back. Do not be fooled by the "128 MB!". The GeForce 5200 is quite possibly the worst graphics card in the history of the world. My 5-year-old Radeon 8500 128 MB beats the 5200 handily in virtually any benchmark.

That same Pentium 4, with 1 GB of RAM, and a Radeon 9600 XT would score much, much higher.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: Computer Rating
by makfu on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:12 UTC in reply to "RE: Computer Rating"
makfu Member since:
2005-12-18

That same Pentium 4, with 1 GB of RAM, and a Radeon 9600 XT would score much, much higher.

No, actually, it will not (my own GF6600 Go 128MB Pentium M 2Ghz box only scores a 2).

The mistake is thinking the score is on a 1-10. It's not. And I quote:

"The rating system is designed to accommodate advances in computer technology, so the standards for each level of the rating system stay the same. For example, a computer rated as a 5 should remain a 5 unless you decide to upgrade the computer's hardware. Newer computers with the latest hardware will usually have higher ratings than older computers, and newer computers can usually run more advanced programs with better performance."

In short, your 2009 Vista machine running a 4 Ghz Quad-Core 64bit 16MB L2/L3 cache CPU with 16GB of RAM and a 2GB dual core GPU will score a 12... not a 10. The idea is the scoring method (which is generated with a real built-in benchmark test) will remain constant, allowing OEM's to use the rating to market a machine.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Computer Rating
by Tom K on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Computer Rating"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

Uhh ... ?

I know how the scoring system works. What you're saying, though, is akin to "Your score will stay the same if you upgrade key components of the system". It will not.

I'm sure that a 9600 XT 128 MB with a 2.8 GHz P4 and 2 GB of RAM would bump up the score to a 3.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Computer Rating
by moleskine on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:39 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Computer Rating"
moleskine Member since:
2005-11-05

I know how the scoring system works. What you're saying, though, is akin to "Your score will stay the same if you upgrade key components of the system". It will not

Actually if you upgrade too many key components, I should think it's quite likely that Vista will shut down on you and your data and order you to buy a new copy for a "new" computer.

I'd like to know how much ram Vista is typically going to use out of the box, how many services it will have running and other overheads. I know it looks nice, but after a month of two of staring at a screen, Vista's look won't seem quite so special any more. How well it works is the real deal.

Reply Score: 4

v RE[5]: Computer Rating
by Tom K on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:50 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Computer Rating"
RE[6]: Computer Rating
by kaiwai on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 05:01 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Computer Rating"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

You've got a point about how well it will work though. I have no doubts that Vista will be a better experience than XP, seeing as how they've had 5 years to improve things, and XP is already a reliable worhorse.

Babe, most of the work on Windows Vista lay below the surface - XPS as part of the Windows Presentation Foundation, DirectX, acccelerated GUI, Indigo, WinFX (replacement to Win32).

Many of the features won't be fully appreciated until third party software vendors bring their software up to date and using the new APIs, so of course to the geek who can't be bothered reading a white paper will find the features unappealing, but for those who have spent a little time on Microsofts site, looking at all the technology they're cramming into this version in terms of technology overviews (not marketing documents), there is alot there to digest.

Windows Vista, although marketed to the computer illerate end user will appear to be nothing great, to the developer who has been pleading for the issues to be fixed in Windows, they'll be pleasently suprised with the changes.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Computer Rating
by Tom K on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 06:24 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Computer Rating"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

What's with the "babe"? It's not like you stated information that I don't know.

Reply Score: 1

RE[8]: Computer Rating
by siki_miki on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 13:22 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Computer Rating"
siki_miki Member since:
2006-01-17

Exactly. Vista has big under-the-hood improvements many will not appreciate. They will however switch and eventually enjoy software which will use it.

But sincerely, XGL effects look better. Nature of open source GUI's will enable them to evolve to extreme eye candy, as soon as this year!

I don't think vanilla windows will have have plugin-based combined compositing-window manager. I doubt that they even declared compositing API for third party developers (at first they will probably use it only internally with their task switcher and Avalon).
However, they can add something like that anytime, there isn't a big roadblock.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Computer Rating
by leos on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:55 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Computer Rating"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

I'd like to know how much ram Vista is typically going to use out of the box

Task manager reports 550 MB used after bootup (for the previous build). Keep in mind that this is a debug build and this number will likely go down.

As for the number of services and gadgets, this is a concern for me as well. Sure processors are powerful and can easily handle it, but what about on a laptop? Is windows smart enough to turn off all the background services when I'm running on battery?

Reply Score: 2

RE[6]: Computer Rating
by JustThinkIt on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 02:00 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Computer Rating"
JustThinkIt Member since:
2005-09-04

I'd like to know how much ram Vista is typically going to use out of the box

Task manager reports 550 MB used after bootup (for the previous build).

It would help to know how much RAM you have. XP scales it usage to the RAM installed so I imagine Vista does as well. [Extra points for your XP task manager memory usage after bootup].

Floyd
http://www.just-think-it.com

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: Computer Rating
by leos on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 03:52 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: Computer Rating"
leos Member since:
2005-09-21

It would help to know how much RAM you have.

1GB

Extra points for your XP task manager memory usage after bootup

Sorry, too lazy to reboot right now, but after a couple hours of usage, with Firefox, Bitcomet, 1 explorer window, and miranda open, task manager says 206MB used.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Computer Rating
by dcibils on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:28 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Computer Rating"
dcibils Member since:
2005-12-28

So, it's just like Futuremark's 3dMark software!

I think it's a good way to know how fast your computer perform. Just as your 3dcard do with 3dMark.

Some vendors, claim that their PCs score like 10,000+ in 3dmark to sell gaming PCs.

Now, we'll see major vendors fighting for the crown in the windows rating world!

Nice.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Computer Rating
by MORB on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:15 UTC in reply to "Computer Rating"
MORB Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't see the point of the rating anyway.

You cannot just take the whole setup and say "it's good" or "it's bad", it depends on your needs.
These shots demonstrate this by giving a crappy score to a machine just because it has a crappy graphic card, even though it's more than enough for office applications.

I can't help but think that the ultimate goal of this thing is to help alleviate the "competing with old windows versions" problem in the future by encouraging people to think that their pc needs to be upgraded or replaced instead of just sticking with it because it already does everything they need.

I can't think of any other obvious point in the whole rating stuff.

Edited 2006-02-22 21:16

Reply Score: 2

remarkable
by jimmystewpot on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 19:56 UTC
jimmystewpot
Member since:
2006-01-19

It looks remarkably like MacOS or Gnome in the way it draws many of its windows. Is this part of the Innovation microsoft has been raving about ?

Reply Score: 2

RE: remarkable
by situation on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:53 UTC in reply to "remarkable"
situation Member since:
2006-01-10

Hate to burst your bubble, but the common Joe end user will think Microsoft is innovating like nobody's business. To them fancy floating transparent jazz will be a whole new world, and they will love Microsoft for it. So to them, it is innovative, and therefore Microsoft can market it as such.

Reply Score: 2

RE: remarkable
by sappyvcv on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:19 UTC in reply to "remarkable"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm sorry, but I don't see how it likes like OSX or Gnome at all, aside from the fact that all operating systems use windows and wigets.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: remarkable
by Drawnstories_studios on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 00:40 UTC in reply to "RE: remarkable"
Drawnstories_studios Member since:
2005-12-12

the windows are identical to OSX, minus the brushed metal gradient. oh and the icons are on the other side. So yeh its toally diferent from OSX *rolls eyes*

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: remarkable
by sappyvcv on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 00:43 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: remarkable"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

How are they identical?! Either be specific, or stop making stupid claims.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: remarkable
by Drawnstories_studios on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 01:02 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: remarkable"
Drawnstories_studios Member since:
2005-12-12

okay please. please observe:


http://www.masterfreelancer.com/graphics/gpx001-screen10.gif


now minus the brush metal, but buttons on other side, make buttons square........

http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/11/0,1425,sz=1&i...



I also spy an ipod shuffle button.

http://common.ziffdavisinternet.com/util_get_image/12/0,1425,sz=1&i...

Edited 2006-02-23 01:10

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: remarkable
by sappyvcv on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 01:31 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: remarkable"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

You think those look alike? Wow wow wow. Wow.

As far as the shuffle icon. Um, ok. It's a small shuffle icon, of course the general look of the icon might be the same as another product.

Christ dude, you are REALLY reaching.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: remarkable
by Drawnstories_studios on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 02:17 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: remarkable"
Drawnstories_studios Member since:
2005-12-12

okay okay, I guess it may just be all the glass and shading. and the rounded corners.

thats basically what the screenies provide. But it will leave us with this OSX clone once thats done. an OSX clone that cant work on anything older than a year. wich will hurt for MS but they'll survive. only the good die young.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: remarkable
by sappyvcv on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 02:20 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: remarkable"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

I don't see any glass in the mac osx screenshot.

And rounded corners?

Ok, now I know you're trolling. My mistake for engaging you.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: remarkable
by proforma on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 03:22 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: remarkable"
proforma Member since:
2005-08-27

I honestly do not see anything on Windows Vista that looks like OSX.

The pictures you provided did not make your case at all and in fact made you look more like a troll than anything real.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: remarkable
by Banquo2 on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 01:47 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: remarkable"
Banquo2 Member since:
2006-02-22

I don't know what you're looking at, but those two screenshots look absolutely nothing like each other. Also you can't say things like "minus the brush metal, move this over here, make it this shape, etc". You could do that with anything and make it similar to something else.

Reply Score: 5

RE[6]: remarkable
by Drawnstories_studios on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 02:15 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: remarkable"
Drawnstories_studios Member since:
2005-12-12

you can't say things like "minus the brush metal, move this over here, make it this shape, etc"

erm. no. this

http://static.flickr.com/24/103239342_7146b32ece.jpg?v=0

and this

http://istpub.berkeley.edu:4201/bcc/Winter2002/Images/macosx.screen...

are different. It takes alot more explanation to make them similar. though it is possible at both ends to tweek preferences to look identical.

If you dont see the similarites than I wont put you down for it. But when you do, dont ever say Mac OSX was mimicing windows. Cause the collective ass was kicked by apple first.

I put my case to sleep, though the likelyness you'll leave it there is low.

Reply Score: 0

RE[7]: remarkable
by sappyvcv on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 02:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: remarkable"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

No, that's where your case belongs because its absolutely ridiculous.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: remarkable
by CuriosityKills on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 02:18 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: remarkable"
CuriosityKills Member since:
2005-07-10

Drawnstories_studios: I wish AI works like your brain, it would be so easy to recognize human faces. He move his nose to the left, move the eye to the mouth and whoa we match a human with a dog..lol

Anyways kidding aside, the screenshot you showed earlier were not same at all. In fact they were totally different.

Reply Score: 1

Stunning...
by linuxh8r on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:05 UTC
linuxh8r
Member since:
2006-01-09

I can't wait to buy my copy! The UI is stunning.

Reply Score: 2

Very impressive
by ronaldst on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:10 UTC
ronaldst
Member since:
2005-06-29

I can't wait to purchase Vista. Sad to see that they still haven't learned that "widgets" idea was/is a bad to begin with. And thumbs up for the media sharing.

On a side note, I wonder how fast will the KDE guys implement a "sidebar" of their own. Not that I am suggesting that they dedicate themselves to cloning Windows. Not at all... ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Very impressive
by abraxas on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:48 UTC in reply to "Very impressive"
abraxas Member since:
2005-07-07

They won't. They already have superkaramba and it is being integrated nicely with KDE4/Plasma.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Very impressive
by Drawnstories_studios on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 00:44 UTC in reply to "Very impressive"
Drawnstories_studios Member since:
2005-12-12

rofl I already have one. I have had one since KDE 2. And yeh, all you do is make a second panel. alighn it to a side. and load it with widgets or panel apps. and Bam!! you've picked it up a notch.

get with times meng...

all though I am more than kinda pist off that plasma has adopted XP vomit colors.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Very impressive
by ronaldst on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 03:03 UTC in reply to "RE: Very impressive"
ronaldst Member since:
2005-06-29

That's a ToolBar silly. Windows had that since the Shell Desktop download upgrade for Windows 95.

And no the "Little Fishes" in ToolBar doesn't count as a widget. Even if it's the first thing people are gonna download...

Reply Score: 1

My favourite screenshot
by leos on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:48 UTC
leos
Member since:
2005-09-21

http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&s=26945&a=171997&po...

:)

But seriously, it looks pretty decent overall. Not "5 years worth of work" decent but "incremental improvement" decent. I'll settle for that.

Reply Score: 3

v ...
by Buck on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:52 UTC
RE: ...
by sappyvcv on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:23 UTC in reply to "..."
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Maybe before you open your mouth and make a fool of yourself, you should do some research on all the changes under the hood. But no, you see a new interface and assume they are wasting all their resources on that and not making any other changes. Way to go.

Reply Score: 4

Optimizations
by situation on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:57 UTC
situation
Member since:
2006-01-10

Hopefully they included more optimizations in this build, or at least the beta Nvidia / ATI drivers got better. I know the last build I tried was not as snappy as one would hope, and this was on a decent machine (3ghz P4, 1gb RAM, Nvidia 6600GT).
I doubt I'll buy Vista, unless some groundbreaking game is released that only runs on Vista. Considering the current dry market, I doubt this will happen. Featurewise nothing jumps out at me, I would rather they had kept WinFS instead of dumping it for things like Sidebar. NTFS + defragging should not have to happen in 2006.
Although they may have taken ideas or built on previous UIs, it's still good to see Microsoft being forced to keep up with everyone ones. Competition is always a good thing for making the slow giants move.

Reply Score: 2

Looks kinda nice..
by CharAznable on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 20:58 UTC
CharAznable
Member since:
2005-07-06

It actually looks like a pleasant environment, unlike the eyesore that is Win XP. Fortunately, my interaction with XP is usually limited to double-clicking on the WoW icon ;)

Edited 2006-02-22 20:58

Reply Score: 2

v I guess I'll download it
by Anonymo on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:08 UTC
v who cares?
by celt on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:39 UTC
RE: who cares?
by FreakyT on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:48 UTC in reply to "who cares?"
FreakyT Member since:
2005-07-17

"More bloated, inept, garbage from Microsoft...nothing new."

That's right, everything Microsoft makes is "bloated and inept." Just ignore the fact that OpenOffice takes far longer to start and much more memory that MS Office, despite the fact that it has less features.

And I just hate Microsoft for how "inept" their software is. Just look at Windows, and the way it's capable of autodetecting hardware properly and allowing for easy binary driver installations. I, for one, find this irritating; we should have to recompile modules to install drivers! All this ease of use hurts the computer industry!

(that was sarcasm)

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: who cares?
by daan on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 22:31 UTC in reply to "RE: who cares?"
daan Member since:
2005-07-07

And I just hate Microsoft for how "inept" their software is. Just look at Windows, and the way it's capable of autodetecting hardware properly and allowing for easy binary driver installations.

(...)
(that was sarcasm)


Yes, thanks for reminding me! Windows is great at detecting hardware. For example in how well it detected my USB controller as a "Not supported VIA USB controller". To make it work, I had to choose the Reinstall Driver option, and then choose the "Generic VIA USB controller" to make it work.

The stupid thing is, both drivers come with Windows by default! Why does that stupid Windows choose the not-working dummy driver, when the real, working driver comes with Windows as well!?

Or my ISA sound card, consisting of a SB16-compatible part and an extra virtual device to control some things. NetBSD just recognises it as SB16, under DOS a normal SB16 driver works as well. But not under Windows. It fails to auto-detect the card as SB16, and when I tell the SB16 driver that I have such a card at IRQ this and DMA that, Windows simply refuses to accept that.

Of course, there is an official WDM driver, but then the computer crashes constantly when playing sounds. Yes, the binary driver system of Windows surely is great!

Edited 2006-02-22 22:31

Reply Score: 5

RE[3]: who cares?
by Banquo2 on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 23:20 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: who cares?"
Banquo2 Member since:
2006-02-22

You're complaining about it not recognizing an ISA sound card? Who in the world still has ISA slots anyway? ISA is not plug and play, and it's not even supported in Windows anymore. I seriously doubt anyone is going to be running Vista on an ISA based system. Next you'll be mad because it won't recognize your 8-bit MFM fixed disk controller card.

Edited 2006-02-22 23:23

Reply Score: 5

RE[4]: who cares?
by raver31 on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 09:04 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: who cares?"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

why not ? microsoft makes a big deal about backwards compatability. This applies to more things than your games you know.

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: who cares?
by sappyvcv on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 16:31 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: who cares?"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Yeah, app-wise.

If you're using a system with ISA still, it's probably not really a computer you should be running Vista on anyway.

Reply Score: 1

RE[6]: who cares?
by raver31 on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 18:36 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: who cares?"
raver31 Member since:
2005-07-06

why ?
there are some solutions that onlt an isa card card fix. like irq problems if the card uses jumpers.

Reply Score: 1

RE[7]: who cares?
by PlatformAgnostic on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 22:25 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: who cares?"
PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

ISA is no longer supported in Windows. If it happens to work, then great, but I don't think MS does any testing with it. Windows XP isn't meant to be an embedded OS or compatible with all hardware out there, so why make a big deal out of this?

Yes, yes... linux might handle ISA hardware. But if you're running hardware that still has ISA, you're probably not in MSFTs target audience.

Reply Score: 0

FUgly
by abraxas on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:46 UTC
abraxas
Member since:
2005-07-07

I still think Vista is ugly. A blue sphere that protrudes from a black taskbar! What were they thinking? I also dislike the bigger than normal close button on the titlebars. It looks uneven. I really hope Vista comes with themes other than the default because whoever designed the interface is totally lacking in artistic ability. Of course it makes senes considering the fact that the default theme for XP is disgusting as well.

Reply Score: 2

Start slowly
by DonQ on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 21:57 UTC
DonQ
Member since:
2005-06-29

From screenshot:

These programs are causing Windows to start slowly
... svchost.exe
... explorer.exe

Interesting, how many users will attempt to disable loading of these resource hogs?

High support need expected ;)

Reply Score: 4

Nice
by Banquo2 on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 22:19 UTC
Banquo2
Member since:
2006-02-22

It's getting closer all the time. I didn't like the way Vista was shaping up but it's really starting to look nice now. I just hope they got rid of that dumb looking disembodied user pic that hovered above the start panel.

Reply Score: 1

v More Bugs To Come
by hraq on Wed 22nd Feb 2006 23:39 UTC
buttons
by amaze_9 on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 00:27 UTC
amaze_9
Member since:
2005-11-12

They look like thery're straight out of Linspire

Reply Score: 2

v Trolling will not get you anything in life
by proforma on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 03:03 UTC
It's BETA software
by proforma on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 03:06 UTC
proforma
Member since:
2005-08-27

>Interesting, how many users will attempt to disable >loading of these resource hogs?

>High support need expected ;)

Hey jackass, it's called a beta. Lets see your programming. Show everyone in the forum how you can create something better than vista.

Reply Score: 2

Beta and Released
by alx1975mskfrk on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 03:49 UTC
alx1975mskfrk
Member since:
2006-02-23

<Hey jackass, it's called a beta. Lets see your programming. Show everyone in the forum how you can create something better than vista.>

Well einstien, the fact is Apple Mac OS X is already an established OS not a beta.
And it's highly rated, if MS was so good then how come the NTSA drop them from possiblities of controling AirPlanes. They even said we don't want our radars crashing.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Beta and Released
by sappyvcv on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 16:28 UTC in reply to "Beta and Released"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

No general purpose operating system should be used to control airplanes, OS X included.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Beta and Released
by proforma on Fri 24th Feb 2006 02:38 UTC in reply to "Beta and Released"
proforma Member since:
2005-08-27

>Well einstien, the fact is Apple Mac OS X is already >an established OS not a beta.
>And it's highly rated, if MS was so good then how
>come the NTSA drop them from possiblities of
>controling AirPlanes. They even said we don't want
>our radars crashing.

Well I wouldn't want OSX or Linux running planes either. See in case you don't understand people's lives are at stake here and any OS that is available to the public should not be used for things like this.

After this weeks issues with OS, I surely wouldn't trust it to put on Airplanes either. I wouldn't trust linux or Windows either.

It's called being safe and not allowing any open source or closed sourced public operating systems being used. If it was me I would not use any public uNix, linux, MacOS, or Windows to be used by any government agency. I would have a seperate non public high secuirty (read military security) OS used that would not be public anywhere and would be on it's own encrypted network outside of the Internet.

Reply Score: 1

Mac OS vs. MS
by alx1975mskfrk on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 03:56 UTC
alx1975mskfrk
Member since:
2006-02-23
Side note
by kaiwai on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 06:48 UTC
kaiwai
Member since:
2005-07-06

Regarding Windows Vista and that whole rating scheme, it isn't out of 10 I think, its based on most to least important in regards to its impact on performance, and what it is out of is based on its importance, for example, the first one might be out of 10, whilst the bottom one might be out of 5, depending on its contribution to over all performance.

Reply Score: 1

Icons
by Lowspirit on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 10:43 UTC
Lowspirit
Member since:
2005-07-08

Why are only some getting an overhaul? It may still not be done but we saw the same coming to XP where there still are tons of icons from Win95/98 in places.

http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&s=26945&a=171997&po...

http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow_viewer/0,1205,l=&s=26945&a=171997&po...

I'm not saying either look better just that side by side one will look out of place, just as when you open anything admin related in XP today.

Not a biggie but thought someone might know, one would think it'd be such an easy thing to take care of.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Icons
by n4cer on Thu 23rd Feb 2006 14:08 UTC in reply to "Icons"
n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

Why are only some getting an overhaul? It may still not be done but we saw the same coming to XP where there still are tons of icons from Win95/98 in places.

The icons are still being worked on. There could still be some old ones by RTM, but at this point it's too early to make that judgement.

Reply Score: 1

ISA hardware might as well be punchcards
by proforma on Fri 24th Feb 2006 02:30 UTC
proforma
Member since:
2005-08-27

Well if you are running ISA hardware even on Linux, you must not be doing much with it.

If you are still running on an old 486 running useless programs then maybe it's time to upgrade. You can still run the latest version of DosBox that will run all of those programs.

Reply Score: 1

proforma
Member since:
2005-08-27

This isn't highly known, but watch this 41 minute
video from Microsoft's Channel 9 about Peer To Peer
API and other support built right into vista.

This video is free and does not require any signup, just click to play and you are ready to go.

http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=165133

Also if you want to learn more about TCP/IP and Vista's Networking stack you can check this video out here:

http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=116349

This video will talk about the redesigned networking stack that uses Compound TCP/IP instead of just the standard flavor.

Reply Score: 1