Looks like there's a few Marketing 'teaser' articles trickling out to try to convince us all that Windows is GOOD before the successor to Vista can get to have too rough a ride...

A few interesting snippets are given in Windows 7 Designs That Didn't Make It

One interesting bit is their 'Design Principles' list:

   1. Reduce concepts… Increase confidence
   2. Solve distractions not discoverability
   3. UX before knobs and questions
   4. Personalization not customization
   5. Lifecycle of the experience
   6. Small bad and good things matter
   7. Be great at “look” and “do”
   8. Building for mobile people

To my mind, that is rather a curious mix. There also looks to be various 'inspiration' from how the Mac desktop looks.

More interestingly, what would you want from a new improved:

Operating System?

Desktop, Graphical User Interface?


(Note that the article focuses just on the 'look and feel' and eye candy...)

Or is consistency and 'no change' of greater importance? No time to learn new tricks??

Are Microsoft onto a winner or loser on this one?

Cheers,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

... [Windows7] Are Microsoft onto a winner or loser on this one?

Or does noone care?

Cheers,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Well, personally, it really worries me that microsoft haven't really got any competition, I like the products and they have been user friendly for averaging 6 months before they start going wrong, as usual, I get comfortable with the template then it stops operating the way it should, sort of like computers and warranties, as soon as the warrantee expires the computer decides it doesn't want to work anymore.

My opinion is other companies should compete and have price competitions, the microsoft programmes are really expensive and really, most people can't afford the majority of them. Computer's are an excellent resource for humankind, but, I believe that they are heavily priced and that really is just greed.

Everyones got a clue who the documented richest man on the surface of the planet is. Isn't it about time they shared some of this technology around places that really need it.


The way the planet is facing, that say's a lot about who think's their clever.
I've done the sum's.



Norman Copeland.

Norman-I'm sorry but the way the planet is facing is not involved with Microsoft having any competition....besides they do..... Linux... Mac.

---

Well.. just to have said so; Im almost on
the top of it. - the planet - ;-D

---

I am one of very few who actually likes Vista **ducks behind sofa to avoid arrows.**

My only real complaint is that it is such a resource hog. Even on my desktop (3 gb ram, 2,4 gHz AMD dual) it will sometimes freeze for 5 to 10 seconds while it sorts background stuff out.

So my desire would be for Windows 7 to be a little leaner.

---

Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

I don't seem to have that problem on any of my Vista machines, and in particular the least powerful of them. Its a Pentium 4 Extreme Edition 3.4GHz (512KB L2, 2MB L3, 800MHz FSB) with 2GB of RAM running Vista Home Premium x86. Of course this system doesn't get much daily use; it only runs BOINC and the ocassional LAN party game.

[Edit] I'm actually concerned about 7's security since ArsTechnica posted an easy real world method of getting around 7's security which wouldn't work with Vista's UAC. I'll take the security feature over the speed anyday, especially since I am not having any speed issues with Vista on any of my machines.

---

I am one of very few who actually likes Vista **ducks behind sofa to avoid arrows.**

My only real complaint is that it is such a resource hog. Even on my desktop (3 GB ram, 2,4 GHz AMD dual) it will sometimes freeze for 5 to 10 seconds while it sorts background stuff out.

So my desire would be for Windows 7 to be a little leaner.

No arrows from Me Mac, As if I were shooting they'd be crossbow bolts instead of arrows.

While I like Windows 7's looks and all, I like the Start Menu from XP/Vista and not having to search for a program as It means one has to remember what is installed and what one is looking for and of course that there is no official upgrade path for XP x64(or just XP) short of buying Vista x64 Business(I refuse to pay for Ultimate).

---

The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's

I am one of very few who actually likes Vista **ducks behind sofa to avoid arrows.**

My only real complaint is that it is such a resource hog. Even on my desktop (3 GB ram, 2,4 GHz AMD dual) it will sometimes freeze for 5 to 10 seconds while it sorts background stuff out.

So my desire would be for Windows 7 to be a little leaner.

No arrows from Me Mac, As if I were shooting they'd be crossbow bolts instead of arrows.

While I like Windows 7's looks and all, I like the Start Menu from XP/Vista and not having to search for a program as It means one has to remember what is installed and what one is looking for and of course that there is no official upgrade path for XP x64(or just XP) short of buying Vista x64 Business(I refuse to pay for Ultimate).

LOL. And you don't need to upgrade to Vista, XP is fine for everything. The only reason that I have Vista on my desktop is because it came with it.

To clarify: I did hate Vista. . .when I first started using it. But I hated every OS while still in the learning stage. (All the way back to Win 98). I presently hate Linux because I am teaching myself how to make it work. When I have it figured out, I will probably love it.

@ OzzFan Possibly my problem with slow down is that I have lots of other stuff running as well. BOINC (of course), Norton (returns to hiding behind sofa), plus I usually have PhotoShop or Cakewalk (or both) running as well. ;oP

---

Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

I am one of very few who actually likes Vista **ducks behind sofa to avoid arrows.**

My only real complaint is that it is such a resource hog. Even on my desktop (3 GB ram, 2,4 GHz AMD dual) it will sometimes freeze for 5 to 10 seconds while it sorts background stuff out.

So my desire would be for Windows 7 to be a little leaner.

No arrows from Me Mac, As if I were shooting they'd be crossbow bolts instead of arrows.

While I like Windows 7's looks and all, I like the Start Menu from XP/Vista and not having to search for a program as It means one has to remember what is installed and what one is looking for and of course that there is no official upgrade path for XP x64(or just XP) short of buying Vista x64 Business(I refuse to pay for Ultimate).

LOL. And you don't need to upgrade to Vista, XP is fine for everything. The only reason that I have Vista on my desktop is because it came with it.

To clarify: I did hate Vista. . .when I first started using it. But I hated every OS while still in the learning stage. (All the way back to Win 98). I presently hate Linux because I am teaching myself how to make it work. When I have it figured out, I will probably love it.

@ OzzFan Possibly my problem with slow down is that I have lots of other stuff running as well. BOINC (of course), Norton (returns to hiding behind sofa), plus I usually have PhotoShop or Cakewalk (or both) running as well. ;oP

Only 98? Sounds recent.
I started with computers long before PC DOS came out.
I know It makes Me an old fogey.

---

The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's

I'm really glad it is possible to be as successful in business as Bill Gates, he is the inspiration for younger businessman, I applaud the Bill Gates foundation, but, I don't believe that microsoft have passed their success on to the consumer base. Ttuefully it is the finest example of American gluttony.

They have gotten to big for their own Britches ! :o)

---

LETS BEGIN IN 2010

They have gotten to big for their own Britches ! :o)

That is true to some extent but as they only have Linux in it's various forms to compete with(OSX is a closed/hardware bound system)it realy has had the field to it's self for years,if the various versions Linux want to compete they will have to come as complete as does Windows with all drivers etc instead of having to hunt down and install them yorself I have said this on other forums before if Apple realy want to compete with Microsoft release a version of Osx that is not locked down to just one set of computer components.Thats my twopennith......

---

Old enough to know better(but)still young enough not to care

They have gotten to big for their own Britches ! :o)

... if the various versions Linux want to compete they will have to come as complete as does Windows with all drivers etc instead of having to hunt down and install them yorself ...

I find that driver support on linux is more complete than for the stock Windows drivers. In linux, there's also no hunting down old drivers on dodgy advertisement-ware 'drivers' websites, as there's no need to.

So... linux comes pretty 'complete' as it is.

More of a problem is that for some 'strange' reason, you can never buy it pre-installed on any system from a retail store...


So how does Microsoft maintain such a complete retail monopoly?

Cheers,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Maybe it isn't so strange once you actually apply logic to the situation.

Maybe if Linux actually charged for their releases to earn some income, they could afford to spend money on advertising to garner interest in the product, then perhaps there would be a higher demand for the OS, which means vendors would be more than happy to preload Linux onto their systems.

Since some of the corporate versions of *nix charge money, perhaps they are not so interested in advertising to the home market because they aren't interested in selling software to the average user, because they know the average users consumes so much support time which in turn means more cost to the company after the sale.

The consumer versions of Linux that do not charge, or only charge for limited support, perhaps if they charged a bit more in the cost for the product, they could afford to fund a marketing department to actually advertise.

...but then the price wouldn't be right anymore, would it? Then people would start complaining about the high prices of Linux, and actually have higher expectations because "you get what you pay for".

No. Charging for Linux wouldn't suit its business model. Instead, it is easier to attack the competition and leave all sorts of inuendo about its anti-competitive practices. Its much easier to whine and cry that someone else is much more successful than you than it is to actually compete with them head-to-head.

---

I think that the biggest problem with Linux is that it is just too hard to use for the average computer user.

A couple months ago, I installed Ubuntu (generally considered the simplest to learn distro) on my laptop. I will never be able to run SETI on it because I can’t find the folders where it stores the program data so I can’t install optimized apps.

Likewise, I can’t find drivers or whatever to let me install and use Photoshop. Or Cakewalk. Or anything else.

The problem with Linux is that it was created by computer geeks for computer geeks. I consider myself to be a reasonably adept regular computer user so if I have trouble figuring this OS out what about the stressed business owner or the harried mother of four or the grandmom who just wants to see pictures of the grandkids?

When some distro of Linux comes along that is as easy to use as Windows or Mac, then it will become popular but not before.

---

Pure mathematics is, in its way, the poetry of logical ideas.

Albert Einstein

I started by translating IBM Mainframe model 25 routines from machine language to Autocoder for Motorola (Franklin Park Il.) and eventually to BAL.

As for PC's - they didn't exist. I got into that with PC DOS - creating ASCII screens with compiler basic. I LIKED IT - link together a series of batch files and you had your own windows as long as you could bypass Basic's tendancy to scroll the monitor.

My days of pioneering are over I think - I wait and listen to the screams of leading edge Microsoft users - and when the hubub dies down - I make the switch.

My favorite Microsoft was windows 3.1 - I could do strange things with it as long as I applied the basic law of Assembler - which is DO NOT BREAK ANY RULES and it's axiom which reads HOWEVER YOU ARE ALLOWED TO BEND THE H*** OUT OF ANY OF THEM.

Sounds like I might like switching to Linux.

---

Classic WU= 7,237 Classic Hours= 42,079

Sounds like I might like switching to Linux.

I've been a happy PC user my entire life. DOS was always my preferred OS of choice because I love the command line. Writing advanced .BAT files was my specialty, and I had a nifty tool that would compile the .BAT files into .COM files for speedier execution. I started writing programs with menus and other such utilities just as a hobby.

I have also been a fan of every Microsoft OS, from Windows 2.0 to Windows Vista and even 7 Beta to some extent. I loved playing with IBM's PC DOS, Digital Research's DR DOS, IBM's OS/2 was fun to play with but was essentially useless due to lack of support of programs (there's Win-OS/2, but what's the point? Might as well just stay with Windows).

That being said, I simply can't get comfortable with Linux. From the illogical (IMO) disk structure/file hierarchy to the over-configurability that I spend more time toying that I do doing anything useful (don't get me wrong, I love to play, but playing on Linux isn't fun IMO). The lack of software support and the fact that I have to ask how to do everything, including the simplest of tasks (and it was not like that when learning Windows or even DOS), to the consistent arrogant nature of those using Linux and the crass anti-Microsoft attitude is a real turn off in that community.

I consider myself a very advanced computer user, and Linux is just plain crazy to use. As Kenz said, it needs to be much simpler before it will penetrate the home market, but I'm afraid the geeks who use it do not want that to happen. They want their anti-MS OS and they want to keep it all to themselves while praising its superiority and Microsoft's inferiority and fooling themselves into false senses of security and insistent on its "ease of use", when I really think they've lost touch with what "ease of use" really means.

All my opinion, of course.

[Edit] Not that your experience will reflect that of my own. Actually, I would even encourage anyone who is interested in trying to test out Linux. If they like it, more power to them. I just don't care for it myself, and I'm tired of the anti-MS rhetoric that is always more FUD than truth.

---

I am a Linux user since 1996. I have no antivirus, only a firewall, and no virus.
Tullio

---

i have vista, and i don´t have any viruses either, i had a flu earlier winter but it never get a change to turnout to illness before antivirus system in my body beat it, but on computer, never had a virus on windows.
( i have tried linux but did not like it, i make music on computer and linux does not support it nor the programs i use)