| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
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 |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Longhorn Update | |
|
||
| Time: 11:16 EST/16:16 GMT | News Source: ActiveWin.com | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Ok for all those doubters - the screenshots posted by Winbeta.org from Longhorn are real. We have received screenshot after screenshot of fakes over the last few months but finally on Saturday proper ones came out. Here are some other snippets of news that have trickled through to us from Microsoft today.
| ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 26 through 50 of 212 Prev | Last | Next |
The time now is
4:37:51 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #26 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 10/21/2002 6:49:11 PM |
|
Jerk, I don't know about the panes. I think they should be more easily managed (e.g. I want them, I don't want them, I want them when I ask for them, etc.). All I know is I don't see them very often, and when I see them, they are usually useful. Since they are useful when I see them, I like them.
As for Longhorn, first of all this thing could be fake. I thought I'd heard from Jim Alchin recently that there would be a lot of 3D stuff (perhaps like that Microsoft Research thing that was talked about a little while ago). I didn't see any of that. There could be pieces of the UI that aren't past the design stage yet. DirectX 9 isn't out of beta yet, "Everette" isn't either. Since Longhorn will have two releases of the .NET Framework past "Everette" (with "Whidby" shipping when "Yukon" does), "Avalon" might not have the ability to do the new graphic stuff that will be done. When I heard "new interface" I thought it meant that the user would see new stuff (aparently it is called "Plex") AND that the programmers would have new stuff ("Avalon"). As for ClearType, I hope they go to all ClearType. I don't know of any reason why they wouldn't. Then again, I don't see why they didn't make it non-Mandatory in Windows XP. |
| #27 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/21/2002 7:05:15 PM |
|
So, Bob, when you click "New" from the "File" menu, you don't get the task pane? Of course, I can do things like resize and reposition it, etc... but in Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Access (even)this is the behavior that I get... by default, and I haven't found an option to deactivate this additional step.
JWM, I'm not saying some of this won't be a little bit more sophisticated, but the more sophisticated this stuff is, the more subtle it should be. 3D in GUIs is best used when it still looks like it was done with 2D but it's actually easier to do in 3D. For example, warping a window... But "crumpling"? Too much whistle, zero bang. Sliding, layering? Sure, absolutely. But, as I questioned, if ClearType isn't capable enough that Microsoft will actually "ship" it for font display... since type still looks like a Casio watch from '88, I wouldn't wait on "crumpling", flying trash cans, you know? This post was edited by sodajerk on Monday, October 21, 2002 at 19:31. |
| #28 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 7:33:40 PM |
|
SJ -- Cleartype is the default with XP SP1 and will be default from now on.
If you don't wan't Task Panes in Windows, open explorer My Computer. Go to Tools|Folder Options, and change Tasks from "Show Common tasks in folders" to "Use Windows classic folders". For Office XP, I can't help unless you haven't tried Tools|Customize|uncheck Task Pane checkbox. JWM -- The new UI is not going to be seen probably until they enter the beta phase. Right now I think they are working on getting the APIs converted to managed code. Remember that this is Alpha. Like I said, I think they are simply using XP is as stable base for which they can test and develop the new APIs while the kernel team works on constructing the new OS from the ground up. Windows XP's UI as it is today did not get implemented until somewhere around Beta 3 if not RC 1 IIRC, so there is plenty of time to get the new UI straight. The cosmetic stuff is the last thing they worry about. While they have people working on it, they don't implement it and decide on a final look and feel until late in the beta. One thing you can count on is and accelerated GDI+ via managed DX that allows seamless mixture of 3D and video content with the ability to apply realtime transformations and effects, and, of course, greater web integration. How this will be realized in its final form, I can only guess currently. I don't think MS will be going to a 3D spatial UI. If they do, it will most likely be a subtle mix of 2D and 3D that doesn't totally do away with the desktop paradigm or require retraining. If they do go spatial, I think it will be different than something like Task Gallery. Whatever the final form, I don't think you'll be dissapointed. |
| #29 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 7:40:42 PM |
|
Forgot, Cleartype will also be accelerated, take less passes to render (1 instead of 3) because of it, and display adapters will have glyph caching (Matrox Parhelia already has this/I'm pretty sure Radeon 9700 and NV30 do as well/ I think it's a DX 9 requirement IIRC). Textures for the UI will be handled efficiently in system memory and have low latency between system and card memory. Cards with DX 7 or higher drivers will be required for DX 9/10 acceleration support. Also greater than 32-bit color support. This post was edited by n4cer on Monday, October 21, 2002 at 19:44. |
| #30 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/21/2002 7:46:38 PM |
|
enforcer, thanks for the tip, but I'm not talking about Explorer or Windows, I'm referring to app-specific task panes that don't appear to have a universal or standard control for this...
I'm still on 2000 for my OS, so my options in Exploer//Tools are for Active Desktop (set to Classic) and enable Web Content in Folders (set to yes)... As for within Word, there isn't a Tools//Customize//Task Pane checkbox. I've disabled some of the task panes, but in my experience, each type of pane has very different types of controls. I'm just trying to avoid the New Doc task pane specifically. |
| #31 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 7:55:52 PM |
|
MS is also working on a replacement for VGA (UGA).
http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/tech/display/uga/UGA-firmware-spec.asp These are the planned Graphics specs for Longhorn from WinHEC 2002 (Powerpoint Slides): Windows Graphics Architecture A New Graphics Platform and New Requirements http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/WHP/1.0/WXP/EN-US/WH02_Graphics04.exe (4.1 MB self-extracting zipped PowerPoint presentation; May 2, 2002) Windows "Longhorn" Graphics Infrastructure and Text Rendering http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/WHP/1.0/WXP/EN-US/WH02_Graphics03.exe (3.9 MB self-extracting zipped PowerPoint presentation; May 2, 2002) DirectX Graphics Video Rendering http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/WHP/1.0/WXP/EN-US/WH02_Graphics02.exe (378 KB self-extracting zipped PowerPoint presentation; May 2, 2002) http://download.microsoft.com/download/DirectX/Trial/1/W98NT42KMeXP/EN-US/20020624WinHecT18c.exe (9.8 MB self-extracting zipped Windows Media presentation; July 30, 2002) Hardware Accelerating Desktop Graphics and Color Management http://download.microsoft.com/download/whistler/WHP/1.0/WXP/EN-US/WH02_Graphics01.exe (496 KB self-extracting zipped PowerPoint presentation; May 2, 2002) You can find more info at: http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/futurepc/winhec2002/default.asp and http://www.microsoft.com/winhec/sessions2002/default.mspx Also "Future Directions" http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/futurePC/default.asp This post was edited by n4cer on Monday, October 21, 2002 at 20:00. |
| #32 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 7:57:09 PM |
| Keep in mind that any references to Blackcomb in these presentations should now apply to Longhorn. |
| #33 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/21/2002 8:07:12 PM |
|
enforcer, do you mean WUXGA? Because WUXGA capable monitors, LCDs have been shipping for a fair while. I don't think it's Microsoft working on it--I think it's more a question of Microsoft begging OEMs to advance their video connectors/monitors/graphics cards so that larger resolutions can be taken for granted.
Sorry, didn't follow your link. Hasn't UGA been around for a while too? The progression being: VGA, SVGA, XGA, UGA, UXGA, and then WUXGA. Don't see how this really relates to GUI developments though... You can attach a 22+" WUXGA Flat Panel monitor with 1900x... resolution up to Windows today. Doesn't make the GUI more advanced, just means you can afford a $2000+ monitor. This post was edited by sodajerk on Monday, October 21, 2002 at 20:19. |
| #34 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 8:16:00 PM |
|
Haven't heard of WUXGA. Will have to look it up, but if it is like XGA in terms of being a resolution standard, it isn't the same thing.
Taken from MS WinHEC site: "UGA, the Microsoft vision for a replacement for VGA, is a hardware-independent design that encapsulates and abstracts any low-level graphics hardware in a standard way by the use of firmware. It will not require the use of real-mode assembly language, direct hardware register or frame buffer access to program. It will provide support for basic drawing operations, continuous display modes and, eventually, power management. As a firmware-based standard, it will allow future evolution to support new hardware features as they become available." |
| #35 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 8:19:16 PM |
| Ok, I get it, Widescreen UXGA. No, it's not the same. |
| #36 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/21/2002 8:27:49 PM |
|
Yeah, we were both just dabbling in each other's posts. So it's video firmware. Not really a replacement for VGA than is it? After all VGA specifically refers to the 640 x 480 pixels at 60 fps resolution format, and we are all actually use to SVGA or greater by now. The list I provided being video resolution formats... commonly misapplied to hardware and/or connectors as if it were a hardware format when it is in fact a video rez format.
Again, what does it offer? Doesn't sound like anything to me... especially if they are setting it up in opposition to VGA--something that was surpassed long ago and something which has a clear (and expensive) roadmap into the future. |
| #37 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 10/21/2002 8:28:20 PM |
|
Jerk, sorry, I didn't realize that the first time you said "new" you got it from the file menu. I was thinking about the new document icon just below the file menu. Yes, I always get the task pane when I click File | New. I have no idea how to get rid of it. Conversely, I also don't know how to always make it stay open (I was trying to do that a few weeks ago). n4cer's tip will make the task pane go away if it is currently open, but won't turn it off permenantly.
JWM (#45) Why are you glad to hear me say that? What did I say? Wow, n, you are a wealth of graphic software rendering info. |
| #38 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 8:29:29 PM |
| I think you can look at UGA as a better, updated VESA. It provides a standard interface for display hardware and calls for a certain level of standard features to be supported, but the hardware can easily be upgraded as the standard changes since it's firmware based. I haven't looked at the spec in detail, though. |
| #39 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 8:31:47 PM |
| Old info Bob, I just remembered where to look for it. :-) |
| #40 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 10/21/2002 8:34:56 PM |
| Still, it's old info that I never learned. |
| #41 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/21/2002 8:43:55 PM |
|
Still don't see what it offers--sounds like a feather in their cap when no one cares to pluck that particular bird.... after all, this firmware spec isn't going to determine video formats or resolution formats--the video industry is doing that and the roadmap is long and set. Power-management would be nice, but if power delivery isn't a feature from the get go, hardware would need to be redesigned to support it anyway (I presume, but I imagine it's difficult to manage power via a video connector if there's still an independent power supply and the video connector isn't supplying the power!)..
No problem, Bob, but yes, most of my docs will be created from a template... I never understood why they didn't have a hieracrchical menu for "New..." or even "New Doc" which just led to a nice pulldown (Blank Doc or Templates // different Templates ) instead of bringing up the big dialog box, but that's the way they do it, I suppose. When do they disappear on you? Once a task pane pops up, it stays up... or at least that's how I remember it. |
| #42 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 8:45:03 PM |
|
Has anyone heard how they are going to handle backwards compatability? Will they still allow unmanaged programs, but depricate those APIs in favor of managed? Or make unmanaged code run in a managed environment somehow (like a sandbox)? Will the OS be managed down to the kernel? This post was edited by n4cer on Monday, October 21, 2002 at 20:48. |
| #43 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 10/21/2002 8:59:46 PM |
|
Backward compatibility I'm sure is a huge concern for Microsoft. Not only interms of what an application expects, but also what a user expects. I rather like the Windows interface. As with task panes - it doesn't get in my way and it does what I want when I tell it to do something. I don't have a problem with the paradigm (as jerk does - the blank grey box when opening an MDI app and other things). I'm quite OK with the current task bar (unlike RMD who much prefers an OS X Doc-like feel. For the most part, I don't think about the UI. When something new comes along (if it doesn't get in my way), then I'm just as happy to use that as I was the previous thing. I think the most important thing in UI design is consistancy. I feel that Microsof has done a good job of that.
UI things that I don't like - the hidden menu thing that started in Office 2k (not a big annoyance, but kind of bugs me) Apps like VisualStudio when run as SDI (I think Delphi's IDE runs this way by default). This is a big reason that I don't like using Macs. I like the grey space when I open an MDI app. I also like that when I have an MDI app open, I can't see other apps throught it, in it, over it, or whatever. I'm quite happy to ctrl+c in the first app, alt+tab, then ctrl+v in the second app. Help buttons that don't lead to context sensitive help information Needless extra steps (I think this is jerk's complaint with the "New" task pane, although I personally like this one) Toolbars, menus, etc. that I can't customize easily. This is one big UI reason that I love IE and don't like Netscape, Moz, etc. I have a very defined look for IE. I've had it for more than 4 years now. I don't want my browser to have its toolbars displayed in any other manner than that. The only way for me to make it look like what I want in Moz would be for me to learn XUL. I'm not willig to do that, so I use IE. I like IE better for other reasons, but that's a different subject. One other thing, I HATE is the task bar at the bottom. I always have mine on the top and can't easily work until I move it to the top. Even when I work on Solaris, I move the taskbar like thing (I can't remember if it has a name or not) to the top. Menus are at the top of applications, and the menu of the OS should be at the top of the OS. Just my opinion. |
| #44 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/21/2002 9:00:13 PM |
| See, there's a lot that I think we can discern from these Alpha screenshots about the GUI, but an issue like that, enforcer... That probably won't be determined until this time 2004... too big of an issue and too many clients to piss off (on both sides) that could potentially lead to bad press... Although I doubt it'll be managed down to the kernel. |
| #45 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 10/21/2002 9:10:07 PM |
|
Jerk, I totally agree with you on templates. I don't see why that don't offer that as an option. At the very least the "New Document" task pane should have a customizable list of places where templates can be found. Microsoft isn't the only site doing templates, I'm sure. There might be a place somewhere in Tools | Options for that, but since I usually don't do templates, I haven't checked.
BTW when I said "backward compatibility" in my last post I wasn't referring to the n4cer comment directly above it. Now I'll comment on n4cer's (#65). I've heard two thoughts on this. One is that the entire Win API will be managed. This would mean that any unmanaged appps would run in a managed emulator subsystem. I guess this is kind of like WOW VDMs which came out with NT 4 to run 16 bit apps. The other that I've heard is that things will continue as they are now (a base managed API), but that there will be some hardcore optimization for managed apps. I don't understand how this would work other than duplicating the Win API (e.g. having a managed and an unmangaged, rather than as it is now the managed is just a wrapper for the unmanaged). It seems to me that the first option would make more sense. It would be a LOT of work to do though if they plan to support all Win32 apps. It's bad enough with the 9x vs. NT Win32 apps. |
| #46 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/21/2002 9:11:57 PM |
|
"Needless extra steps"? I'd jsut say stupid steps--half the options don't refer to new docs.
Inconsistency, inconsistency, inconsistency... Inconsistent: each task pane is different--of course, but, I'm referring to their controls... look at the bottom of each one... Some have settings you'd expect in all of them, some have stupid links to MS Help, etc... Some have links to things that could be task panes but are still wizards or dialog boxes for some reason... Some dialogs and wizards, you would expect to have a pane for, but they don't exist... Clip Art gets a task pane (and a wizard and a dialog) but Macros don't? Styles but not Themes? I guess even MS knows nobody uses their stupid Themes... This is just quick and off hand... does anyone else see lots of potential inconsistencies arising in the new interface? |
| #47 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 10/21/2002 9:13:15 PM |
| Jerk, forgot to mention that when I click on the new document icon OR when I successfully open a doc or create a new doc from one of the task pane options, the task pane goes away. I think there are other options, like File | Open or selecting a doc from the MRU list at the bottom of the File menu which make it go away too. |
| #48 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 10/21/2002 9:15:38 PM |
| Oh yeah, I expect inconsistancy from any new interface. One that bugs me in Windows XP is that when I open a command prompt running in Luna Mode (Style mode or what ever the non classic mode is called) it doesn't have the new style. |
| #49 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 10/21/2002 9:25:59 PM |
|
Oh, I see, that makes more sense... You definitely seemed to be talking a different sort of compatibility. Yes, it can be disruptive--simply look at the MacOS Dock--something that I don't find very revolutionary (though I do like it) and something that in many ways is more familiar (to Win users and Nix users), but whcih gets railed against because people don't know how to jump into the new metaphor. It can be risky changing stable interfaces--which is why I'm always baffled by people who propose these "advanced" interfaces of the future. None of them sound desirable to me. For example, even an intelligent datastore... I still want to store files in trees instead of flat, because why would I want to always remember or query things like: I created this file in this app on this day with this person and it realted to this project... why wouldn't I just look in the project file? But that's a side issue--it'll be interesting to see how adventurous MS will be.
Oh, Bob, I see your problem. See... another weird issue--good interface design or bad, you decide. THe task pane window is specific to each document window... so if you are creating a new document or opening a different one--that document window will display (or not) the task pane as you setup for that document window. I just tested it out--setting open task pane at start up and creating a few docs, switching around the task panes... each doc has independent control of its related task pane. So, what you want can't be acomplished... the task pane would remain set to whatever it remained in the app rather than being specific to the document. So which is better: tying task panes to document windows or tying task panes to application windows? I can see why you'd want it tied to the app, but I can see where that would cause problems too. |
| #50 By 2459 (24.233.39.98) at 10/21/2002 9:32:28 PM |
|
The command prompt couldn't be modified to the new look due to its original design back in NT. I forget the specifics, but it would require redesigning the prompt and the dev team for that was no longer available or had to work on more important things. I can't remember the exact details. I think it was basically too much work and could break other things just for a point release and a fairly trivial (relative to other things that needed to be implemented) visual issue.
This should be remedied in Longhorn. This post was edited by n4cer on Monday, October 21, 2002 at 21:35. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 26 through 50 of 212 Prev | Last | Next |
The time now is
4:37:51 AM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
