| 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 |
 |
Where Vista Fails | |
|
||
| Time: 17:34 EST/22:34 GMT | News Source: WinInformant | Posted By: Chris Hedlund | ||
|
I still remember the day very clearly. It was Monday, October 27, 2003. Several thousand developers--and, let's face it, quite a few garden variety Windows enthusiasts--charged into Hall A at the Los Angeles Convention Center (LACC) like teenage girls at a Justin Timberlake concert, volleying for the best seats. I've been to more Bill Gates keynotes than I can count, and this was the first time I ever saw anyone climb over other people in order to secure a better view. (No offense to Mr. Gates, but he's not exactly a dynamic speaker.) It was PDC 2003 and everything was right with my world. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 152 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:31:20 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2459 (24.175.137.39) at 4/19/2006 8:18:08 PM |
| I'm not bothering with the other opinions, but is it really that hard to tell that the active window is the one with a lit close button and white backing around the title text (if any)? Non-active windows have no backing and completely clear minimize, maximize, close buttons. It shouldn't take long to figure out. |
| #2 By 1401 (65.255.137.20) at 4/19/2006 9:13:20 PM |
| Yeah - I could see that as well, but I still agree with his point. |
| #3 By 8589 (68.113.198.230) at 4/19/2006 10:47:48 PM |
| Vista isn't failing. It is surpassing the earlier model. This kind of diatribe is beneath this site. |
| #4 By 44902 (82.35.214.88) at 4/20/2006 2:13:51 AM |
|
Absolutely agree with stupid security dialog boxes. Why I have to "allow yourself" to do something if I'm already admin? Stupid, incredibly stupid. It's like to enter password each time then I want to open my fridge even if fridge stays in MY kitchen. Protection from children?!
But completely disagree with glass windows section. Which window is top-most? Who cares about this?! It means NOTHING! Very stupid question. It's not usefull information at all. MS designers done greate job in "glassing" borders. Look at stupid Stardock's implementation! I'm turned it off on second hour because window caption becames just unreadable without bluring. |
| #5 By 5912 (62.58.60.27) at 4/20/2006 3:11:22 AM |
|
#4: I disagree with your on the top-most issue. It's just a small thing but they shouldn't change stuff like that when there was nothing wrong with it in XP. I would never start a campaign to have this changed back but then again why is Microsoft trying to give me a reason to do that? MS should try to remember the "if it ain't broken then don't fix it" rule a bit better. This post was edited by rnmboon on Thursday, April 20, 2006 at 03:12. |
| #6 By 7754 (65.27.90.2) at 4/20/2006 3:15:46 AM |
|
First off, I agree regarding the admin protection dialogs; however, three points: 1) these dialogs and the whole model should be significantly cleaned up by release; 2) this is the only real option; and 3) they may get bit if they don't require a user name and password. Consider the method used by some other OSes (OS X, and some Linux distros): when you elevate to admin access, in some situations, you've opened yourself up to malicious attack for a given period of time, rather than until the desired function/task is finished. Microsoft's model is more annoying, but it closes a significant security hole. However, because people blindly click through dialogs without reading them, they can put as many prompts in the way as they want, and people will just click through until they go away. It's only when they have to enter their user name and password that they will think twice.
Honestly, though, I find myself paying less and less attention to Paul's take on things. Personally, I feel that he (along with much of the tech media) tends to review Windows almost strictly from a consumer mindset, and furthermore, always through the prism of OS X. He puts his focus on the built-in apps, and only covers the technology "guts" on a very superficial level. I think that is a mistake. The OS X model and ecosystem is wholly different than that of Windows. For example, the most popular mail app on Windows is Outlook--not anything built into Windows. It's not a moot point necessarily, but it is of questionable value to compare how the "Windows email client" compares to the one in OS X. As I see it, the mistake Paul makes is a mistake of perspective, or rather, approach. Certainly, most business customers aren't approaching new versions of Windows comparing it OS X, but of an older version of Windows. Moreover, they aren't approaching it from the perspective of Windows alone, but a whole ecosystem made up of Windows, a host of applications, and a lot of years of user experience. Do they really care how it compares to OS X? Not in a practical sense; perphaps the enthusiast pays attention, but even then, for most it rarely weighs in on their decision. Even on the consumer side, I think Paul makes a mistake in paying too much attention to built-in apps, and not enough on built-in platform technology. Microsoft has always rather conservatively chosen what it develops for built-in apps, mostly leaving it up to partners and other 3rd parties. I agree, Vista's DVD application is pointless (so far), but in two ways: it's pointless in that it's hopelessly hobbled, but also because no one probably cares--you'll get a better DVD application pre-installed with the PC, or it will come with the DVD burner, or whatever. That model is certainly something for debate, but debating the merits of the Vista DVD application itself is probably not that worthwhile. I realize it's an evaluation of Windows alone, but it's probably not worth getting too bent out of shape over what are probably irrelevant shortcomings in reality. What is really disappointing, though, is that Paul rarely digs below the GUI and application level, and even if he does, it seems like lip service. For example, look at the threading model available in Windows vs. that of OS X--there is no comparison. OS X is seriously deficient in this area, and I've not once heard it mentioned in any tech media article. This will become more and more important and apparent as processor manufacturers turn to multicore designs to increase performance. Look at Group Policy... look at Remote Desktop (particularly the performance)... look at the .NET Framework... look at the very fine-grained file permissions... look at the true 64-bit support... look at the new networking stack... the list goes on and on. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 152 Last | Next |
The time now is
3:31:20 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
