Nearly missed this:
http://www.tech-critic.com/modules.php?name=N … order=0&thold=0
😀
Beta-testing, Vlad (or anyone else)? Everything I've read about seems that it's a Win98->Win98SE style update, not a Windows 2000->Windows XP one. 😀
"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen
Stiletto
Hmm except that win98se is an improvebt over win98.. I have serious doubts now looking at the "new" gui. (Looks like a some kde ripoff to me, maybe nicer implemented.. though the nicer will cost ya some rescources).
Like the new taskbar though!
"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen
Stiletto
It's is a crappified ripoff of OS X. I'm sorry, but it is. I still like my 'classic' Windows look (since Win95 and going strong!). It's not the prettiest thing in the world, but it's compact and really damn functional.
Yes, it’s my fault.
Oh no. I've seen blackcomb (erm no not a beta) on Cebit. It's concept is bad. They we're planning on distributing software (like ms office) through the internet. So ms can bill us per usage of thei're software.
Blackcomb was to make all of this possible.
(Hmm maybe this is a good thing, or maybe they changed their mind. It was like a year ago)
meh... I fail to see what the big deal is there, it's not like you own the software in the first place.
I actually considered taking MS up on their Office subscription offer at one point (before I read they'd cancelled it due to numbnuts not realising it was an ongoing thing). The way I saw it you paid something like a quarter to a third of the full retail cost and got free upgrades, including new versions if they became available, for a year. Given that MS release a new version of Office ever 2-3 years in the long term it works out a little bit cheaper to subscribe than to simply buy a licence outright. Of course, you're probably forced to upgrade to the latest and greatest whenever it became available but I don't have a problem with that.
And now Paul Thurrott reviews it:
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_alpha.asp
"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen
Stiletto
Great. A 3D GUI. What more can they do to reduce productivity? Make it like the mainframe in Hacker?
Yes, it’s my fault.
wrote:Great. A 3D GUI. What more can they do to reduce productivity? Make it like the mainframe in Hacker?
I was thinking more like the [edit by Snover: ...] oldskool flightsim frontend in Jurassic Park:
http://www.sgi.com/fun/freeware/3d_navigator.html
http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~lloyd/tildeImages/Film/JPark/
http://cg.cs.tu-berlin.de/~kai/tablet/fsndt.html
😁
"I see a little silhouette-o of a man, Scaramouche, Scaramouche, will you
do the Fandango!" - Queen
Stiletto
*cough,ahhem,Stiletto...*
Dude, Windows Classic interface is the cleanest, most productive GUI you can have. Big buttons = less functionality. Unless you need big buttons, which you can actually change the size of in the Classic GUI. Besides, the bold colours that XP uses are UUUGLY.
Yes, it’s my fault.
wrote:*cough,ahhem,Stiletto...*
Dude, Windows Classic interface is the cleanest, most productive GUI you can have. Big buttons = less functionality. Unless you need big buttons, which you can actually change the size of in the Classic GUI. Besides, the bold colours that XP uses are UUUGLY.
Funny thing is, Windows 3.1 had big, chunky buttons and I saw no one complaining about them...
I've been using XP for a year, all with the new GUI and it hasn't been any more of an impediment to my productivity than the old one was, a little less in fact now that MS have actually done something remotely useful with the panes in the folder windows (I just wish I knew how to add my own custom stuff in there to make copying MP3s from my KaZaA shared folder to my main MP3 folder as easy as copying files from My Documents to my ISPs web space).
I find the dull greys and 16 bit icons that Classic used (which didn't even cover the whole desktop, even in 2000 the system tray was limited to 16 colours without 3rd party tools and icons in there looked butt ugly) to be far uglier than anything in XP.
Very true,
Ever gazed at apples macOS X. That's where microsofts "Human Computer Interface" research department is at. If they'll stick to it windows should become more productive.
I'd like transparent windows wen placed to background and multiple (customizable) (start) menu's.
(I'm exagerating a bit btw)
Oh, I know that Luna is a cheap ripoff of Aqua and doesn't quite come up to the latters standard, in either appearance or functionality but its still light years ahead (in both categories) of previous Windows GUIs. Trouble is, a lot of people aren't giving it enough of a chance to see that.
I know how people like Snover think in this situation because when all I knew about Luna was what I saw in screenshots I had all the same reservations but there was one important difference between me and them: I was determined to give Luna a chance and if I didn't like it, I knew the off-switch was only a few mouse clicks away.
That was a year ago. Today, I'm sitting here, still using Luna and still using the default style (albeit with the 'Silver' theme, arguably the best of the three you're given) simply because after giving myself some time to get into the groove (something you have to do with just about every OS, not just XP) all my fears were quickly laid to rest.
Well believe it or not the default theme's in XP for "business" use and for my home use actually hinder productivity and I've been using XP since it entered beta. Yes, hard to believe isn't it? Someone who's actually used it and hates it. Wow.
Enough already. We each have our own reasons for our own preferences. There are things I like and things I don't like about the various OS's out there, but they are Operating Systems, they're not my kids...and there's no reason for me to act like they are.
If we're going to discuss them, lets try to do it without sticking each other in the eye in the process.
I like XP for various reasons. It's has the stability and features of the NT OS, it has the "creature comforts" of the Win9x OS. My biggest reason for getting it though, was a package of hardware and software that worth about $170-250 that was free after rebate with the purchase of XP Home.
See, everything I've come to like about XP came later, I only upgraded because I didn't have the patience to wait for people like DosFreak to come up with a stable 2000 solution to the problems I was having with Final Fantasy VII and with XP looking like it provided the solution (which it did, at least at Microsofts end) I took the plunge almost immediately I got hold of a copy. I paid exactly the same price for both (dick all 😁) and now, a touch over a year later, at that price, I'd rather have XP, not just for FFVII but for all the other things I've discovered along the way.
ePSXe has been around for longer than XP. The ported FF7 sucks, too. Dunno why you didn't hunt for a PSX emulator, but whatever.
The default colours that Windows 9x/NT/2K aren't great, but with a minimal of tweaking it looks pretty good. I changed the default 'grey' colour to 192,192,192, which is much better than the dull 5200ºK crap they used by default.
Yes, it’s my fault.
