ActiveMac - The Most Activated mac Resource

ActiveMac

User Controls

New User

Edit/View My Profile

ActiveMac

Articles

Forums

Links

News

News Search

Reviews

News Centers

Windows/Microsoft

DVD

ActiveHardware

Xbox

MaINTosh

News Search

ANet Chats

The Lobby

Special Events Room

Developer's Lounge

XBox Chat

FAQ's

Windows 98/98 SE

Windows 2000

Windows Me

Windows "Whistler" XP

Windows CE

Internet Explorer 6

Internet Explorer 5

Xbox

DirectX

DVD's

TopTechTips

Registry Tips

Windows 95/98

Windows 2000

Internet Explorer 4

Internet Explorer 5

Windows NT Tips

Program Tips

Easter Eggs

Hardware

DVD

Latest Reviews

Applications

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Norton SystemWorks 2002

Hardware

Intel Personal Audio Player 3000

Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer

Site News/Info

About This Site

Affiliates

ANet Forums

Default Home Page

Link To Us

Links

Member Pages

Site Search

Awards

Credits
�1997/2004, Active Network. All Rights Reserved.
Layout & Design by Designer Dream. Content written by the Active Network team. Please click here for full terms of use and restrictions or read our Privacy Statement.

MSDN: Windows Code-Named "Longhorn"

Time: 16:19 EST/21:19 GMT | News Source: Microsoft | Posted By: Jonathan Tigner

Aero User Experience Guidelines

Books

Columns

Technical Articles

Write Comment
Return to News

Displaying 1 through 25 of 154
Last | Next

The time now is 5:49:53 PM ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us

#1 By 2459 (24.175.137.164) at 11/8/2003 6:03:13 PM

If i want huge spastic title bars I would use OS X, If i wanted stupid crapified BMP type widgits I would use Linux and Xfree

Longhorn's UI is vector based. In the final product, everything will be polygons and meshes or color values with various levels of opacity. The bitmaps are only present because this is still an Alpha product.

that means its got to check this schema ONLINE everytime its run?

The namespace declaration doesn't have to map to a live website, nor does it have to check the web (check out Office 2003's XML formats [or most other XML files] for example). It's just a qualifier to prevent naming collisions. It isn't specific to XAML, it's part of the XML standard. Also, XAML doesn't directly control the appearance of windows and controls. The theme engine of the OS does that. If MS made the default appearance of Longhorn to be like Windows 2000, all of your XAML apps would appear the same way unless you applied your own app style. XAML basically maps back to the managed classes. It just makes it easier to seperate the UI from the backend, and allows you to create the UI in a declarative manner and using less code in many cases than the equivalent in C#/VB/etc. If you don't prefer XAML, you can get the exact same results using the .NET languages.

This post was edited by n4cer on Saturday, November 08, 2003 at 18:06.

#2 By 2459 (24.175.137.164) at 11/8/2003 6:29:06 PM

Here's a couple of pages you should probably keep an eye on regarding XAML:

Rob Relyea
Program Manager on the Avalon Team
http://longhornblogs.com/rrelyea/

Avalon, Longhorn & XAML

Avalon is a presentation platform for the next generation of Windows (�Longhorn�). XAML is a markup language that can be used on Longhorn for many things including creating desktop apps, web pages, and printable documents. The system is very extensible. If you want to build your own set of elements, you have the power to do that. If you want to mix those elements with ours, you can. If you want to just use yours, you can. If you don't like angle brackets and would like to use only code, you can do that as well.

Don Box's Spoutlet
http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/dbox/

XAML: Man and Machine

It's amazing to watch people's reactions to my hello, world XAML program.

One mini-meme that emerges is that people wonder how XAML improves the developer productivity situation when it appears from my program that it only makes things worse.

Here's my 2 cents.

Hello, world isn't exactly crying out for XAML. Of course, Hello, World isn't indicative of most real programs in the wild.

XAML is fundamentally about initializing and wiring up object graphs in the CLR. No more, no less. Hello World doesn�t need this, but some (but by no means all) "real" programs do.

Today, the data needed to initialize an object graph is hidden behind imperative statements in your programming language of choice. That makes it difficult to tease out of the rest of your program without weird markers in the source code to delimit the structure of your code into recognizable pieces.

XAML allows you to separate that data into a distinct machine parsable/human authorable form.

#3 By 2332 (65.221.182.2) at 11/9/2003 1:35:12 PM

Those "huge spastic title bars" might just have a purpose you don't know about.

In one of the longhorn screen shots from the PDC, you can clearly see what looks like the thumbnail of a window IN the titlebar. It could be the way that IE implements tabbed browsing, or it could be the way the all MDI-based applications show a list of their child windows.

Either way, it's pretty cool.

#4 By 2332 (65.221.182.2) at 11/9/2003 7:54:45 PM

#7 - If its using images for tab browsing thats pretty shity cuz its not gona scale up to large amount of tabs is it now.

Ah yes. You should let them know that. After all, the billions they spend on UI research might not be able to produce the kind of insights you've demonstrated here. Sigh...

If you actually looked at the windows, they all are not IE.

No kidding. That's why I suggested that it might be a place for minimized MDI windows to be shown.

One thing I do not like its this trend to "My *" folder spam that cannot be disabled without poking in the registry or whatever

That's nice, but the fact of the matter is that most people don't care where stuff on their hard drive is stored... they just want to be able to easily access it. That's kind of the point of WinFS. It's too bad you can't see the potential for this kind of change in the way we store files. The "My *" folders are just the beginning. Soon, there will be no recognizable hierachy in the file system. Instead, you will have "views" that show you the files your interested, regardless of where they are stored. This is a far superior way to organize large numbers of files, and I'm sure we'll see other companies copying it as fast as they can.

Theyre treating us all like blinking morons.

Most people are morons. Or, rather, most people have little or no understanding of computers. They just want to get their work done, or get whatever task they want to do completed. Microsoft is making a serious effort to make computers effortless to use, intuitive in their design, and a part of our lives that we simply don't notice. You don't have to be a mechanic to drive a car, and you shouldn't have to be a nerd to use a computer.

If you want "old school" computing, you'll have plenty of fun with OS's like Linux, which I'm sure will take a few years to copy what Microsoft has done.

#5 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 11/9/2003 10:54:18 PM

#9 "After all, the billions they spend on UI research might not be able to produce the kind of insights you've demonstrated here."

He's just giving his opinion on it, let it go! All those billions also gave us MS BOB!

"This is a far superior way to organize large numbers of files, and I'm sure we'll see other companies copying it as fast as they can."

You mean like BeOS did? I'm all for a database-type FS, I think it's a great idea, but I'm with mOOzilla on this one, I can't stand all the My Music, My Pictures, My Documents etc etc directories... I know they're mine!

"which I'm sure will take a few years to copy what Microsoft has done."

Everyone copies everyone - some copy more than others.

#6 By 2332 (65.221.182.2) at 11/10/2003 12:57:43 AM

#10 - He's just giving his opinion on it, let it go! All those billions also gave us MS BOB!

My point is that his judgements are likely both premature and ill informed.

You mean like BeOS did?

Actually, BeOS never attempted the kinds of things what WinFS will.

I'm all for a database-type FS, I think it's a great idea, but I'm with mOOzilla on this one, I can't stand all the My Music, My Pictures, My Documents etc etc directories... I know they're mine!

Well, the I think you, like mOOzilla, aren't seeing the big picture. In 5 years, people will look back on "c:\" and laugh... much like people look back on config.sys and autoexec.bat and laugh today.

Everyone copies everyone - some copy more than others.

Sure, and I bet that the same people criticising an alpha today will be those copying tomorrow.

#7 By 61 (24.92.223.181) at 11/10/2003 1:00:19 AM

I suppose it would be different if you named the folder yourself? Get a damn life already, it's just a name (and can be changed), what matters is what's in that folder, not the name of it.

BeOS did not have the same type of UI integration with it's database like features that WinFS will have.

WinFS is about changing the way files are stored, BFS was about making searches faster, if that makes any sense.

#8 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 11/10/2003 2:11:05 AM

#11 "Actually, BeOS never attempted the kinds of things what WinFS will. "
BeOS was originally going to have a true DB FS which was later modified to be Journaling FS with certain database type properties if I remember correctly (There was an interview with the developers at some stage and they mentioned that they couldn't do the full DB due to locking issues, latency etc). This was also completely working several years ago rather than still being an alpha. I'm mentioning this only because I can hear the shouts of "Microsoft innovates once again - billions spent in R&D bring us something no-one else has ever done - and something that everyone else will want to copy!". Sure WinFS *may* (once we can get to judge it properly) prove to be far better than Be's FS, but this isn't something revolutionary which has never been attempted before. You could do "views" and run queries against the FS in Be several years ago, it wasn't just about making "searches faster".

Having said all that, I loved BeOS and I look forward to seeing what Microsoft can do, it's too early to judge WinFS.

"Well, the I think you, like mOOzilla, aren't seeing the big picture"
I can't speak for mOOzilla but you don't have to worry about me not seeing the "big picture", I know where Microsoft want to go with this and getting rid of drive letters is a good start, so that rather than users stopping to think about what disk drive or partition they are saving a file to or loading a file from they simply save or load the file they need.

"much like people look back on config.sys and autoexec.bat and laugh today."
Not everything is looked back on and laughed at. People initially laughed at ini (and other property) files when the Windows Registry was anounced - now more and more of those same people are fed up with the Registry and going back to property files (which these days are usually xml property files).

"Sure, and I bet that the same people criticising an alpha today will be those copying tomorrow. "
RMD, Microsoft WANT people to criticise Longhorn! If they didn't they wouldn't have shown it and they wouldn't be making such a big song and dance about it. They want as much feedback as possible, both good and bad, so that they can decide on where to go from there, what features are more important than others etc etc. I don't know why you're so opposed to people criticising it!

#9 By 61 (24.92.223.181) at 11/10/2003 11:37:52 AM

m00, are you saying you do not know how to place files yourself? I have NO FILES in the My folders because I have them all stored on my fileserver. Just because it is the default place to save to when saving a picture, etc... does not mean you can not change the location you want to put it in.

Just because they are there doesn't mean you have to use them.

And there is an easy option, it's called download TweakXP, or an app like it.

#10 By 2459 (24.175.137.164) at 11/10/2003 12:58:16 PM

RE: Custom install

Some shots of various LH builds suggest the UI for this is coming back, but in the meantime, you can use an install script.

http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechnol/winxppro/reskit/prbc_cai_khud.asp

http://www.msfn.org/unattended/xp/index.htm

#11 By 2332 (216.41.45.78) at 11/10/2003 4:41:09 PM

#14 - Actually WinFS is not a true DB core, its just the meta data thats handled in the NT service. Half assed job really.

LOL. Considering you seem to know next to nothing about WinFS, those are pretty strong accusations. WinFS will be far more than the BeOS file system ever was. It will have all of the benefits, and hopefully not the primary weakness: it won't be slow. In addition, it will provide an object-based framework to manipulate all things on the file system.

The "half assed job" was a design decision, not a cop-out.

#12 By 868449 (27.159.225.82) at 12/8/2012 2:50:08 AM

you've got a great weblog here! would you like to make some invite posts on my weblog?

<a href=http://www.buyjordansgo.com/air-jordan-shoes-c-145.html>jordans for sale free shipping</a>

<a href=http://www.newjordansoutlet.com/womens-jordans-air-max-c-301.html>discount jordans free shipping</a>

#13 By 958801 (221.179.173.170) at 12/14/2012 6:50:06 PM

Spot on with this write-up, I really feel this web site needs far more consideration. I'll in all probability be once more to read far more, thanks for that info.

<a href=http://jerseys205.humorme.info/>Customized NFL Jerseys</a>

#14 By 4240821 (45.149.82.86) at 10/26/2023 6:47:45 AM