Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th May 2008 03:15 UTC
Windows I personally doubted that Windows 7 would make an actual appearance during the Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer joint interview up on stage at the D6 conference, but as it turns out, it has made an appearance. During an interview conducted by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher about Ballmer and Gates' past, present, and future, a short demo was given of Windows 7.
Thread beginning with comment 315922
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Windows 7
by sakeniwefu on Wed 28th May 2008 09:31 UTC
sakeniwefu
Member since:
2008-02-26

Well, there's nothing wrong with multitouch as long as they don't overdo it and require it to configure the screen resolution. It has been clear for some time now that they would be doing something with multitouch.
I just hope they don't screw even more with the interface. I for one dislike the likes of KDE 4 and MacOS X. However, if Windows is to be used mainly with touchscreens as opposed to touchpads and keyboard, sucky interfaces might be the only way people will be able to hit a button with their fat fingers. And Microsoft testers are not known by their good taste *cough* Bob *cough* Luna *cough* Clippy *cough* Aero *cough*, I need some codeine.
Windows Vista does some things very well technologically, most of them copied over from MacOS X. I hope they keep that and destroy the old windowing system residues and bomb the ASCII WinAPI at least.
Oh, and stop whining about the kernel. It is as good as it needs to be and has nothing to do with any misfeature of Windows. Kernels mean nothing today. The major ones are all similar in features and performance and there is very little room for improvement. GNU/NT and BSD/NT wouldn't differ much from GNU/Solaris or BSD/Mach. The battlefield is now in the I/O interfaces, and both Windows and MacOS X have a new windowing system from the 2000s now as opposed to something that has been grown since the 70s. Unixers will need to keep their good old hydroponic magic.
As for the toolkits, .NET is yet to show any advantage over Cocoa, QT or GTK, but if Microsoft officially endorses it and states it will be the only platform supported at all in Windows 8 there are already enough developers ready to replace the old ones that made Windows into the crappy platform that it is with their C++ mishaps.

Reply Score: 0

RE: Windows 7
by evangs on Wed 28th May 2008 12:28 in reply to "Windows 7"
evangs Member since:
2005-07-07

As for the toolkits, .NET is yet to show any advantage over Cocoa, QT or GTK, but if Microsoft officially endorses it and states it will be the only platform supported at all in Windows 8 there are already enough developers ready to replace the old ones that made Windows into the crappy platform that it is with their C++ mishaps.


Here we go again ...

You're partly right. Win32 developers will be quite happy to jump ship to a better development choice, should that opportunity every arise. You are mistaken if you think that C++ developers will jumpship to .NET just because Microsoft makes it the preferred development platform. In many respects, .NET already *is* the development platform that Microsoft pushes. See how VC++ is pushed? As a systems development tool and not an application development one. See how much work goes into making C# GUI development competitive then compare that with how MFC is still left in the late 90s.

MS stopped pushing C++ as a client development language when .NET was introduced. The fact that the majority of client side applications are still written in C++ attests to the failure of this effort. To understand why it fails, you need to ask what developers gain by moving to C#/.NET. You gain a slightly safer language, a more modern class library, but then you lose performance. At this point you can point to the numerous microbenchmarks that show C# equaling or surpassing C++ in speed. Nevertheless, at the end of the day users do not want an application that runs slightly slower, consumes 2x - 3x more memory just to provide exactly the same functionality as what they previously had.

C++ is not _that_ bad. Sure, it could be more newbie friendly but the flexibility and the performance make it more than worthwhile. Blaming Windows failings on C++ is disingenius at best. The majority of the OS itself is written in C, and all of its competitors apart from Apple use either C or C++.

MS will never remove existing non-managed APIs in favor of managed ones. Doing so will force developers to rewrite their code, and what's to stop them from going down the Qt route? They get to keep their existing C++ code and they get portability on top of it. Such a move would be detrimental to Microsoft.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Windows 7
by sakeniwefu on Wed 28th May 2008 15:39 in reply to "RE: Windows 7"
sakeniwefu Member since:
2008-02-26

Well, maybe. But I believe that once Windows 3.11/9x API functions are removed from Windows, C++ developer population will slump. Experience tells me that most Windows apps are developed against deprecated APIs and buggy behavior even nowadays. And they suck. And it sucks that Microsoft keeps a buggy system to please crappy developers.

Reply Parent Score: 2