Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 23rd May 2006 21:27 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Windows "Windows Vista Build 5384 has been released to Tech Beta testers at Microsoft Connect. Build 5384 is the real deal: Microsoft Windows Vista Beta 2 Milestone Build! Contrary to public opinion and 'leaked' information, Windows Vista Beta 2 is not a mere recompile of Vista 5381.1 and it isn't 5381.4; Vista 5384 is Beta 2 and it's official! Microsoft has already launched the public download site for Vista Beta 2, but no more than that, only the site is live, but the build is not ready for download to non-techbeta testers yet." eWeek reviews the Beta ("Windows Vista Beta 2 shows steady progress, but the new 3D Aero Glass user interface in particular still flakes out"), and also has a slideshow.
Order by: Score:
Wait
by DrillSgt on Tue 23rd May 2006 22:35 UTC
DrillSgt
Member since:
2005-12-02

I guess I'll have to wait for it. Only have a Technet Plus subscription so have to wait until July. Hopefully one of you MSDN folks can get it and let us know how it is compared to the other builds!

Reply Score: 1

RE: Wait
by mkools on Tue 23rd May 2006 23:01 UTC in reply to "Wait"
mkools Member since:
2005-10-11

We have MSDN, but I don't feel the urge to test this Vista crap, these screenshots are really ugly.
I don't expect anything from it.

Reply Score: 1

180 day version
by John Blink on Tue 23rd May 2006 22:35 UTC
John Blink
Member since:
2005-10-11

Does MS provide a 180 trial version?

I am not familiar with MS's release methods yet would like to try this legally.

BTW I mean for free and legal.

For example,
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserver2003/evaluation/trial/default...

But for Vista.

Edited 2006-05-23 22:39

Reply Score: 1

v The heavy use of all white dialog windows...
by Ralf. on Tue 23rd May 2006 22:36 UTC
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

I think you mean a Windows 1.0 ripoff! I can't believe they're ripping it off using WHITE. geez.

Reply Score: 2

CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

Oh, I see what you mean.



Except it doesn't look like OSX AT ALL.

Reply Score: 5

v Note...
by Shaman on Tue 23rd May 2006 23:37 UTC
RE: Note...
by Marcellus on Wed 24th May 2006 06:22 UTC in reply to "Note..."
Marcellus Member since:
2005-08-26

...where Xorg 7.1 is RELEASED and KOffice 1.5.1 is RELEASED today... and both already have had a release in the last six months... and Vista is still "preparing for beta 2."
Ah, yes.
Because Xorg 7.1 and KOffice 1.5.1 are fully fledged consumer oriented desktop operating systems and can be compared to Vista.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Note...
by lord_rob on Wed 24th May 2006 08:30 UTC in reply to "RE: Note..."
lord_rob Member since:
2005-08-06

What do you get when you buy a Windows license ? A wonderful word processor which is Wordpad. An image processing tool (MSPaint) and also some great games (Solitaire, Minesweeper). A windows license alone is nothing (I don't know about Vista but I doubt it'll be different) so please don't say vista will be a "fully fledged consumer oriented desktop operating system" ...

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Note...
by Zoidberg on Wed 24th May 2006 14:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Note..."
Zoidberg Member since:
2006-02-11

Sorry but that's a silly complaint. If they put more features in people scream bloatware at them and other companies (and entire countries) sue them. What do you really expect them to do? Integrate Microsoft Office? I don't want to pay more for a bunch of extra stuff I may not even use. I just want an operating system, it doesn't have to come with a full office suite, a Photoshop-like program and a bunch of first person shooters. You can buy all that stuff seperately if you want it.

Edited 2006-05-24 14:32

Reply Score: 1

Here's the bottom line....
by ricks1950 on Tue 23rd May 2006 23:48 UTC
ricks1950
Member since:
2006-03-21

Vista will require more CPU cycles and RAM to deliver what XP delivers today.

Vista will require yet more CPU cycles, RAM and video horespower to deliver what it promises.

Vista may or may not have some compelling new features.

Vista may or may not be somewhat harder to crack and infest with virus/spyware/trojan/rootkit/spam/hack tools.

I find it quite easy to contain my excitement......

Reply Score: 5

RE: Here's the bottom line....
by tomcat on Wed 24th May 2006 00:08 UTC in reply to "Here's the bottom line...."
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Let me know when Red Hat starts shipping a Linux distro with desktop compositing...

I find it quite easy to contain my excitement.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Here's the bottom line....
by cprpop on Wed 24th May 2006 01:49 UTC in reply to "RE: Here's the bottom line...."
cprpop Member since:
2005-07-05

Let me know when Red Hat starts shipping a Linux distro with desktop compositing...

Why Red Hat? They've left the desktop market years ago.

Novell, on the other hand, came forth with Xgl and compiz and made them open too. If Vista takes much longer to make the release, it's very likely there's going to be at least one SuSE version shipping with Xgl in the meantime. And probably other Linux distributions will get to do that too before Vista ships.

Reply Score: 4

RE[3]: Here's the bottom line....
by tomcat on Wed 24th May 2006 16:42 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Here's the bottom line...."
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Fine. Pick SuSE. When SuSE ships with desktop compositing, let me know. Otherwise, all of these ridiculous comments about "there aren't any new features" are a bunch of tripe.

Reply Score: 1

v Why...
by JustAnotherMacUser on Wed 24th May 2006 00:24 UTC
RE: Why...
by sappyvcv on Wed 24th May 2006 00:26 UTC in reply to "Why..."
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

This isn't about Macs, get over yourself.

Reply Score: 5

RE: Why...
by Tuishimi on Wed 24th May 2006 06:02 UTC in reply to "Why..."
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

re 1:

Well, some might disagree. I use my calculator, dictionary, web/db server widget, and my ruby doc widget frequently.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Here's the bottom line....
by kmare on Wed 24th May 2006 01:04 UTC
kmare
Member since:
2006-02-05

use opensuse 10.1 for now... no need to wait for redhat ;) of course you could also download the packages and install them yourself on any other linux distribution. And the good news are that you won't need a state of the art pc, a low end pIII with a gforce2mx will do just great!

Reply Score: 2

Complicated
by marcushe on Wed 24th May 2006 02:41 UTC
marcushe
Member since:
2005-09-30

Man, this Vista thing is so crazy complicated judging by these screenshots.

And I thought XP was cluttered and a pain.

Reply Score: 2

New Math
by Aaron1 on Wed 24th May 2006 03:00 UTC
Aaron1
Member since:
2006-01-19

Anyone understand the performance rating screen in the slideshow? The overall rating was 2 but the lowest rating in the details was 2.7

Reply Score: 1

RE: New Math
by Anark on Wed 24th May 2006 04:08 UTC in reply to "New Math"
Anark Member since:
2006-05-23

Microsoft has yet to divulge any information on how these calculations are made. It apparently is not a pure average.

It attempts to look at your CPU, RAM, HD, and Video Card to make an assessment on how "well" your system will run Vista.

Based on personal experience i've found the most important factors to be RAM and Video in raising your score. It was able to go from a 2 to a 3 by change form a pci-e 128 to pci-e 256.

Right now it's purely an assessment tool, but i wouldn't be surprised if at some point this thing started making 'suggestions' on how to improve your system. I can easily envision it being tied into hardware partnerships and advertising campaigns. LOL

Edited 2006-05-24 04:09

Reply Score: 2

I dunno...
by Tuishimi on Wed 24th May 2006 05:58 UTC
Tuishimi
Member since:
2005-07-06

...I don't think it looks all that bad at all. I thought the problem details id'ing the drivers that cause Windows to "stand by or hibernate slowly" was pretty funny. Just get rid of your NIC driver, Audio driver and video driver and you'll be all set! ;)

Reply Score: 1

Back in 2001 ...
by lord_rob on Wed 24th May 2006 08:20 UTC
lord_rob
Member since:
2005-08-06

I couldn't stant waiting for the release of the shiny new Windows XP.

Now I don't care anymore. My need for shiny new software hasn't disappeared but I'm not using Windows anymore. Thanks Debian Sid for providing me with the new shiny and pretty "appz" I need, for free and legally (not that I cared of being legal or not but now I do).

Reply Score: 0

Bottom of the barrel...
by Archangel on Wed 24th May 2006 09:37 UTC
Archangel
Member since:
2005-07-23

Anyone else think Microsoft are really scraping the bottom of the barrel trying to find features for this thing? I can't see anything particularly exciting about the 'features' in it.

The support for running as non-admin users is simply a long overdue necessity, but it looks like it'll be crippled by MS's usual poor attention to detail. If non-admin users can't view the performance monitor (and no doubt other similar things) I can see lots of people just making themselves an admin to get over all the headaches.

I could suggest that RSS support and gadgets on the desktop is a reaction to Apple's latest, but they're hardly the first people to offer that. Strikes me as just another way to put stock prices on the desktop, like there weren't enough already - even going back to the ill-fated Active Desktop. The CPU use one would be nice, but it hardly replaces the options I've got available at the moment.

The Performance Rating is a bit cruel too - that eweek system had an average of about 3.4 or so, but it got 2 (presumably the highest integer less than the lowest result) - which seems a bit tough given the lowest result was for 'only' having 1GB RAM. Neither the CPU nor graphics card set the world on fire any more, but it seemed happier with them - I'm guessing this means Vista will be _really_ RAM hungry?

Anyways, enough bitching. Overall Vista is a good move for Microsoft - towards the features needed for a real operating system - it's just a pity it's only going to be a baby step, when people were hoping for a giant leap.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Bottom of the barrel...
by sappyvcv on Wed 24th May 2006 13:17 UTC in reply to "Bottom of the barrel..."
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

What kind of features would you really look forward to?

This isn't a loaded question, I'm honestly curious.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Bottom of the barrel...
by Archangel on Wed 24th May 2006 19:46 UTC in reply to "RE: Bottom of the barrel..."
Archangel Member since:
2005-07-23

sappyvcv: For example, I would have been impressed if they'd shipped a _proper_ search infrastructure - ie. what WinFS was going to be before it was pulled. The search in Longhorn isn't really any more compelling than Google Desktop, although possibly without some of the privacy issues!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Bottom of the barrel...
by CPUGuy on Wed 24th May 2006 19:51 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Bottom of the barrel..."
CPUGuy Member since:
2005-07-06

The search in Vista is basically exactly the same as OSX search.

Also, WinFS is still in the works and in testing right now. It just won't ship with Vista, but as a separate product.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Bottom of the barrel...
by sappyvcv on Wed 24th May 2006 20:53 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Bottom of the barrel..."
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Yes, WinFS would have been nice. But it's still supposed to come out, so all is not lost.

I don't completely understand what purpose WinFS serves (ssearch is possible without it), so I wasn't really looking forward to it that much.


Anything else?

Reply Score: 0

v RE[2]: Bottom of the barrel...
by Zoidberg on Wed 24th May 2006 14:29 UTC in reply to "Bottom of the barrel..."
Does not look like Mac OS X
by tonywob on Wed 24th May 2006 10:02 UTC
tonywob
Member since:
2005-07-06

I get sick of people saying that it looks like Mac OS X. It looks nothing like it, and I have used a Mac for years. It may have introduced some of Tiger's features, but it DOES NOT look like it. Just because it has shadows behind Windows doesn't mean it is a rip of from Mac OS X.

All the UI goodness will look good on screenshots, and the first few days you use it, but then it will become irritating and probably end up being switched off by most people. Its only there just to sell it and make it look exciting. Similarly I tried out XGL, whilst it looked really cool, I switched it off after ten minutes because it served no purpose and became annoying. Does anyone remember the translucent stripey menus in Mac OS X 10.0, they soon got rid of it.

Another thing people seem to forget is that Microsoft need to ensure Vista is fully backward compatible with older programs. This is bound to add a huge weight to the overall coding of the operating system, whilst the likes of KOffice releases (as mentioned above) aren't (Correct me if I'm wrong). Having companies like Symantec sueing them because they realise half of their products won't sell anymore also doesn't help.

And I love the comments about I'm not testing this because it looks like crap. Well, I guess Microsoft don't want you testing it either since you sound like another "I hate Microsoft" person, which means Microsoft will never win in your eyes.

Reply Score: 5

v RE: Does not look like Mac OS X
by Quoth_the_Raven on Wed 24th May 2006 14:15 UTC in reply to "Does not look like Mac OS X"
RE[2]: Does not look like Mac OS X
by JacobMunoz on Wed 24th May 2006 15:52 UTC in reply to "Does not look like Mac OS X"
JacobMunoz Member since:
2006-03-17

I agree, there are some similar concepts between the two - but they are really not that much alike.

To me, it looks as though Microsoft finally built a 'Stardock Windowblinds'-looking theme, that probably wouldn't have been voted very highly by Windowblinds users in the first place. I know this 'glass' theme can be turned off and you can use the XP theme (maybe classic 9x theme too?) - but why bother with all the effort to make such an awfully-designed theme in the first place? Why would anyone actually care about a blurry semi-transparent frame that can almost visually disappear? Do people like to squint?

The two systems do have a few things in common, though. For one, you can barely tell which window is the 'focus' unless they are stacked over eachother - a MAJOR oversight as far as I'm concerned which OSX also suffers from. The only indication on Aero Glass of the 'focused' window is the coloring of the max/min/close buttons - and these are TINY little things that your eyes have to train to find, especially in cluttered windows. A saving grace that Macs have is the 'one titlebar for the screen' which shows you what app is focused, but when more than one document/window of that app is open, you're back to the same problem of not knowing which one is selected. What idiots decided to make this critical point so badly designed in both systems and why they would do such a mean thing to end-users (who are probably going blind as it is) is totally beyond me. The advantage of Mac's Expose (which I had though was so stupid until I had a screen full of windows) is the 'show all windows' feature - which I hope Vista will make similar use of (but kinda doubt it).

For those that don't always remember, the OSX interface doesn't allow you to resize a window from anywhere except the bottom-right corner - which is a minor nuisance that gets more and more annoying the longer you sit at the desk. Windows has had it right from the beginning in allowing resizing from all four corners and four sides. This is partly due to the fact that OSX windows don't really have a frame border aside from their titlebars, more bad than good to me.

Finder is horrible, Explorer has become overambitious. Neither shell feels ergonomically-oriented, with Finder's mere three view options and Vista's apparent seizure-inducing info-laden Explorer appearance. Explorer needs to step back from being an internet browser interface, and Finder needs to have a few more customizational options (are 'lined-trees' illegal in Apple's philosophy or something?).

Neither GUI has the very basic concept of 'pushing' a window to the back of the stack, or overlaying several windows without the awful 'cascade' appearance. As my favorite OS's interface had these features from the beginning (kudos to the person who guesses it), I think both OS X/Finder and Aero Glass are sub-par. Neither Apple nor Microsoft are completely 'original', and considering the paradigm of 'windows' on a 'desktop' has been around since the 80's it's no surprise to find OS's going in parallel directions - it's not 'ripping off' the competition, it's a common line of evolution.

Peronsally, I'd rather use Windowblinds on Vista than it's native choices, but who knows if that will even be a usable option... tisk tisk, Apple and Microsoft - you both get only 'average' grades for class 'GUI 101'.

Reply Score: 1

this thread
by dmitry on Wed 24th May 2006 16:05 UTC
dmitry
Member since:
2006-01-16

I'm really sick and tired of the bs the majority of you are writing. To be honest I do not care how Vista compares to OSX, KDE and the like (If I did, I'd read some comparison review on that issue). 90% of the thread is offtopic, awfull.
What I'd like to read is the feedback from the people who have Vista Beta2 installed and how it compares to XP SP2/2003 or something. It'd be definetely very very nice.

Reply Score: 3

Agreed.
by ivefallen on Wed 24th May 2006 16:16 UTC in reply to "this thread"
ivefallen Member since:
2006-05-19

There is a bit too much childish bitching and moaning and not enough technical information.

Reply Score: 2