iEye said to behave like XP, not look like XP. Either way, I would want windows 7 to behave like XP, to be slim and snappy, of course with all the good looking features
Please GOD, let this new windows not be made for beginners like vista. I want the control panel similar to XP and please bring back the tabs in control options. I did not switch my laptop because I feel vista is for beginners. I takes me longer to change a setting. I want quick user control access that is NOT DUMBED DOWN!! oh please micro$oft,oh please.
blarvh: I am running XP, it is working fine for me. There is no reason for me to switch. The only reason is Halo 2 PC... but that runs very slowly under Vista! However when I use the hack to make it run under XP, it runs much better.
Of course, this is just me. Undoubtably other users may find Vista seems as responsive as XP... but they likely have one of the following conditions: 1) They don't play any games past Solitaire, where the performance drop becomes most noticeable. 2) They have a new processor. The newer the processor, the better your computer will run. However XP will run even better... but at a certain point the performance gain from XP over Vista doesn't really matter much anymore. I am nowhere near there yet... Vista is simply too slow for my processor.
Even if I tweak Vista's running services, and turn off all the eye candy, there is hardly any speed boost. XP still beats Vista when all of XP's eye candy is ON, and with an anti-virus installed (I just uninstalled AVG and got a significant performance boost out of XP... and it STILL beat Vista then).
That said, I have gotten Vista to run well... when I strip everything out using vLite. At that point, it's basically the same feature set as XP (actually a bit less)... so I don't see any point in using it.
Don't get me wrong... when I get a new CPU I may very well switch to Vista. However at the moment even if I do there's little on that OS that I care for at the moment that I can't get elsewhere for free (IE third party programs etc).
Summary: I don't use Vista because I feel, for my purposes, it is overrated. XP works for me, it's faster for me, and I have no need to upgrade. That is why I (and probably many others) choose XP over Vista.
WRT the start bar, in theory there'll be an option to show full document names,etc , highly unlikely they'll just get rid of it completely.
I don't think it's intuitive at all to have to move your mouse to see what's open. What if you just want to look at a glance, it's counter-productive for most situations, that's an extra mouse gesture you have to do every time you want to see what you've got open.
Personally i think it looks too simplistic. The reason i like XP, and Vista too for the most part is that it looked businesslike - or at least reasonably professional. This just looks a bit too "easy to use" rather than functional. I'm sure it'll actually be nice and intuitive once i've had a play on it, but for now i prefer the functionality of XP/OS X. One thing Apple got right is that their interface has been pretty much the same - and it's very good on the whole - hardware notwithstanding. Windows on the other hand has spent lots of time rejigging interfaces and i can't help but think they should have stayed with the Vista styling which was nice, instead of going for a whole new UI. In contrast, i like how the new app grouping system works. It's a nice touch, it works well when tabbing between windows so it should be good there too.
Otherwise it looks good. Jump Lists are a great idea, file browsing looks well done - i'll probably get this when it's released after i find out what the status of compatibility is, there are workarounds for most things i've found.
Also, and this is a small complaint, I don't like how the http:, www, and slashes are all greyed out in the address bar. I understand the point of it; it highlights the "friendly" part of the URL, but I think it makes it look busy and draws unneeded attention to the address bar.
yea some botons dont look write, just tweek it and make it like the mac dock, just avoid the making of a taskbar nobody likes, just use one that everyone likes (hint hint MAC)
@william O RLY? Like how mac had: -desktop gadgets (no, the widget layer doesn't count, they arent always there, you have to interact to bring it up) -auto resizing windows -transparancy to highlight the window you're peeking at -OS designed for multitouch interaction.......or any kind of touch interaction -a netbook capable OS
Yeah, they've had all these things for like 5 years...oh wait, they don't have any of them, even now.
"2) They have a new processor. The newer the processor, the better your computer will run. However XP will run even better... but at a certain point the performance gain from XP over Vista doesn't really matter much anymore. I am nowhere near there yet... Vista is simply too slow for my processor."
This is on a E6750 which is a fairly decent CPU although, since the issue was craptastic drivers, any Core 2 Duo will give you the same result.
I appreciate that if you're running an old P4 then you might be better with XP - I don't know, never tried it - but if you're buying a new PC you'd be a mug to choose XP over Vista.
Bottom line: Upgrade? No. XP on a new machine? LOL!
@curtisrutland in Tiger (and in Leopard probably) you can display gadgets from Dashboard on the desktop (in devmode). Also, Leopard was installed on netbooks (http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/10/13519/) and seems to run very well. The transparency part is indeed not present on the mac, but honestly this is something that always bothered me in vista. All the transparent and blurry things behind the front window dont help me focus at all. I agree with the auto resizing windows, seems to be a great feature.
Take a look at my comment history and you'll see I would probably be considered an Apple "Fanboy". But I'll have to admit, Microsoft is definitely heading in the right direction. It looks sharp and everything i'm hearing about functionality sounds like some great improvements.
Looks pretty good. Thank god they're revamping the horrible start menu/quicklaunch/taskbar/system tray fiasco. I wish they'd lay off the eye candy a bit, though. It's fine where appropriate, but Microsoft seems to try to take it to the extreme, to the extent that it limits the usable space in the various windows. For example, in the screenshot, they waste ungodly amounts of space on the title bar, menu bar, side bar, and whatever the bar is at the bottom. What, do they get a cut of new LCD display purchases or something? :)
"What's compelling about touch is that it works everywhere in Windows 7. It's not some hokey add-on that works only in certain applications and only partially in others. (I'm looking at you, Apple.) " -Paul Thurrott (www.winsupersite.com)
It seems like MS can't afford to hire a better UI/graphic designer or something... or they simply still don't get it, why Apple keep stealing the market share from them...
Poor nerd in MS, please... please simplify the UI and dress it up like a 21st century system to give us the wow factor... I believe Mac OS is not better than Windows, but it really look gorgeous... and we really care about STYLE & FASHION
"What's compelling about touch is that it works everywhere in Windows 7. It's not some hokey add-on that works only in certain applications and only partially in others. (I'm looking at you, Apple.) " -Paul Thurrott (www.winsupersite.com)
As far as I'm aware, desktop OSX doesn't support multi-touch.
The multi-touch enabled trackpads aren't supposed to replace the mouse - they're supposed to extend the things normal trackpads can do. That's why it's on the trackpad and not the screen.
I actually realy like this OS. Looks very clean and clear. Kinda reminds me of Longhorn during its development. I hope UAC has been improved alot though - it made re-installing all my apps etc after a hard drive failure a labourious task (to say the least).
Now I come to think about it, does anyone know if in theory Windows 7 would be prone to simillar driver issues that plagued Windows Vista's release? Or would it use the drivers which were developed for Vista without much trouble? (Sorry, probably a bit of a noob question. Just curious.)
“An engineer explained to us that hundreds of ear impressions were gathered in the name of research, and while each one obviously boasted its own unique shape and size, one single characteristic remained uniform across the board: the entrance into the ear canal is not a perfect circle, it's an oval.”
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
Not sure if I like the new taskbar...I like my text. What if I have like 4 Word docs open? I want to know which is which.
You hover over, and a pop up shows up showing you all the open word docs.
It seems very intuitive.
You can even hover over one of the docs and that goes to the foreground to show you it.
"The system tray now only displays what you explicitly say it should -- everything else is hidden, and the controls have been streamlined."
No more "Safely Remove Devices"?!??!? About time!
Safely remove devices wasnt exactly the worst idea out there. Compared to OS X.
But yes, it should have been hideable.
Hopefully there is an option to have this OS appear and behave just like XP...
Another issue .. stacking downwards photos right to left is annoying .. should have been the other way.
http://www.activewin.com/screenshots/windows7/Libraries.png
@ iEye
Why would anyone want their OS to look like XP, Yuk !
@Major4Play
iEye said to behave like XP, not look like XP. Either way, I would want windows 7 to behave like XP, to be slim and snappy, of course with all the good looking features
nah .. I don't like the idea of rolling over something to see what it is. that's not intuitive or user-friendly.
tom: appear and look are synonyms.
Please GOD, let this new windows not be made for beginners like vista.
I want the control panel similar to XP and please bring back the tabs in control options.
I did not switch my laptop because I feel vista is for beginners. I takes me longer to change a setting.
I want quick user control access that is NOT DUMBED DOWN!!
oh please micro$oft,oh please.
@tom, read again.
Why do everyone love XP so much? Of course it's quick on modern computers when it's about 8 years old! It's old and overrated.
blarvh: I am running XP, it is working fine for me. There is no reason for me to switch. The only reason is Halo 2 PC... but that runs very slowly under Vista! However when I use the hack to make it run under XP, it runs much better.
Of course, this is just me. Undoubtably other users may find Vista seems as responsive as XP... but they likely have one of the following conditions:
1) They don't play any games past Solitaire, where the performance drop becomes most noticeable.
2) They have a new processor. The newer the processor, the better your computer will run. However XP will run even better... but at a certain point the performance gain from XP over Vista doesn't really matter much anymore. I am nowhere near there yet... Vista is simply too slow for my processor.
Even if I tweak Vista's running services, and turn off all the eye candy, there is hardly any speed boost. XP still beats Vista when all of XP's eye candy is ON, and with an anti-virus installed (I just uninstalled AVG and got a significant performance boost out of XP... and it STILL beat Vista then).
That said, I have gotten Vista to run well... when I strip everything out using vLite. At that point, it's basically the same feature set as XP (actually a bit less)... so I don't see any point in using it.
Don't get me wrong... when I get a new CPU I may very well switch to Vista. However at the moment even if I do there's little on that OS that I care for at the moment that I can't get elsewhere for free (IE third party programs etc).
Summary: I don't use Vista because I feel, for my purposes, it is overrated. XP works for me, it's faster for me, and I have no need to upgrade. That is why I (and probably many others) choose XP over Vista.
WRT the start bar, in theory there'll be an option to show full document names,etc , highly unlikely they'll just get rid of it completely.
I don't think it's intuitive at all to have to move your mouse to see what's open. What if you just want to look at a glance, it's counter-productive for most situations, that's an extra mouse gesture you have to do every time you want to see what you've got open.
Personally i think it looks too simplistic. The reason i like XP, and Vista too for the most part is that it looked businesslike - or at least reasonably professional. This just looks a bit too "easy to use" rather than functional. I'm sure it'll actually be nice and intuitive once i've had a play on it, but for now i prefer the functionality of XP/OS X. One thing Apple got right is that their interface has been pretty much the same - and it's very good on the whole - hardware notwithstanding. Windows on the other hand has spent lots of time rejigging interfaces and i can't help but think they should have stayed with the Vista styling which was nice, instead of going for a whole new UI. In contrast, i like how the new app grouping system works. It's a nice touch, it works well when tabbing between windows so it should be good there too.
Otherwise it looks good. Jump Lists are a great idea, file browsing looks well done - i'll probably get this when it's released after i find out what the status of compatibility is, there are workarounds for most things i've found.
@ Dan Bugglin
That is a poor excuse. Quit being a such a broke fool and get vista.
Kinda reminds me of Mojave.
Also, and this is a small complaint, I don't like how the http:, www, and slashes are all greyed out in the address bar. I understand the point of it; it highlights the "friendly" part of the URL, but I think it makes it look busy and draws unneeded attention to the address bar.
am i the only one to hate XP 64 bit? Vista is way faster in 8gb than xp was.
funny, all this was available on a MAC 5 years ago.... Way to keep up MS
yea some botons dont look write, just tweek it and make it like the mac dock, just avoid the making of a taskbar nobody likes, just use one that everyone likes (hint hint MAC)
@william
O RLY?
Like how mac had:
-desktop gadgets (no, the widget layer doesn't count, they arent always there, you have to interact to bring it up)
-auto resizing windows
-transparancy to highlight the window you're peeking at
-OS designed for multitouch interaction.......or any kind of touch interaction
-a netbook capable OS
Yeah, they've had all these things for like 5 years...oh wait, they don't have any of them, even now.
"2) They have a new processor. The newer the processor, the better your computer will run. However XP will run even better... but at a certain point the performance gain from XP over Vista doesn't really matter much anymore. I am nowhere near there yet... Vista is simply too slow for my processor."
Perhaps, but...
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302499,00.asp
This is on a E6750 which is a fairly decent CPU although, since the issue was craptastic drivers, any Core 2 Duo will give you the same result.
I appreciate that if you're running an old P4 then you might be better with XP - I don't know, never tried it - but if you're buying a new PC you'd be a mug to choose XP over Vista.
Bottom line: Upgrade? No. XP on a new machine? LOL!
I like the idea. I usually have maybe 8-12 windows open, I never get to see the text part anyway, icons would save space and be easier to recognize.
@curtisrutland
in Tiger (and in Leopard probably) you can display gadgets from Dashboard on the desktop (in devmode).
Also, Leopard was installed on netbooks (http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2008/10/13519/) and seems to run very well.
The transparency part is indeed not present on the mac, but honestly this is something that always bothered me in vista. All the transparent and blurry things behind the front window dont help me focus at all.
I agree with the auto resizing windows, seems to be a great feature.
move shit around, put in a little wow, a pinch omg, but did they fix all the errors and warnings in vista? (yes, I have SP fucking one)
Take a look at my comment history and you'll see I would probably be considered an Apple "Fanboy". But I'll have to admit, Microsoft is definitely heading in the right direction. It looks sharp and everything i'm hearing about functionality sounds like some great improvements.
Looks pretty good. Thank god they're revamping the horrible start menu/quicklaunch/taskbar/system tray fiasco. I wish they'd lay off the eye candy a bit, though. It's fine where appropriate, but Microsoft seems to try to take it to the extreme, to the extent that it limits the usable space in the various windows. For example, in the screenshot, they waste ungodly amounts of space on the title bar, menu bar, side bar, and whatever the bar is at the bottom. What, do they get a cut of new LCD display purchases or something? :)
"What's compelling about touch is that it works everywhere in Windows 7. It's not some hokey add-on that works only in certain applications and only partially in others. (I'm looking at you, Apple.) "
-Paul Thurrott (www.winsupersite.com)
It seems like MS can't afford to hire a better UI/graphic designer or something... or they simply still don't get it, why Apple keep stealing the market share from them...
Poor nerd in MS, please... please simplify the UI and dress it up like a 21st century system to give us the wow factor... I believe Mac OS is not better than Windows, but it really look gorgeous... and we really care about STYLE & FASHION
"What's compelling about touch is that it works everywhere in Windows 7. It's not some hokey add-on that works only in certain applications and only partially in others. (I'm looking at you, Apple.) "
-Paul Thurrott (www.winsupersite.com)
As far as I'm aware, desktop OSX doesn't support multi-touch.
The multi-touch enabled trackpads aren't supposed to replace the mouse - they're supposed to extend the things normal trackpads can do. That's why it's on the trackpad and not the screen.
I actually realy like this OS. Looks very clean and clear. Kinda reminds me of Longhorn during its development. I hope UAC has been improved alot though - it made re-installing all my apps etc after a hard drive failure a labourious task (to say the least).
Now I come to think about it, does anyone know if in theory Windows 7 would be prone to simillar driver issues that plagued Windows Vista's release? Or would it use the drivers which were developed for Vista without much trouble? (Sorry, probably a bit of a noob question. Just curious.)