MS Longhorn is history

[blkmage]

but I never saw much point in the "Microsoft = evil" outlook

Besides their business practices.

There doesn't seem like there's a whole lotta reason upgrade. IE7 is on its way to XP, WinFS is not. I don't think there are going to be that many people upgrading because of new ways to search through their computer.

I don't like how the taskbar looks different from the window borders. They should have chose purple or glassy and stuck with it.

It's not like the jump from older Windows to XP. There was really a noticeable difference, what with stability and improved performance. That's not there for Vista. The only people I can see upgrading are the bleeding edge people and the people who are grabbing it from their friendly neighbourhood torrent site.

[shooraijin]

Spotted on CNet; Vista is actually an acronym for Viruses, Instability, Spyware, Trojans and Adware.

Jokes aside, the Veterans Administration's electronic medical records system is called Vista. I wonder what the Feds have to say about billg's latest.

[Fsiphskilm]

Technica

[Link Antilles]

[quote="shooraijin"]Spotted on CNet]


Oooohh, I thought was "Vista" Spanish for "more bugs" or "uber resource hog". Hmm, I may be rusty on my Spanish.

Seriously though, like any new Windows release, I am irked. Being a gamer, I detest *useless* features hogging up the resources of my machine.

[Fsiphskilm]

I person

[Arnobius]

I personally wish they'd make "Windows LR" (low resource) that would have all the little visual garbage taken out of it.

Things like Roll-overs and such, extra animations, transparentcies, wallpaper, indexing, and another useless features that run in the background, ALL taken out.

It wouldn't be for everyone of course, mostly programers and such, people who have a TON of things running at the same time.

If they took all that out, I'm sure windows LR would only take up 100 megs or so in Ram.

I think it's called Win95

[shooraijin]

I personally wish they'd make "Windows LR" (low resource) that would have all the little visual garbage taken out of it.

Things like Roll-overs and such, extra animations, transparentcies, wallpaper, indexing, and another useless features that run in the background, ALL taken out.

It wouldn't be for everyone of course, mostly programers and such, people who have a TON of things running at the same time.

If they took all that out, I'm sure windows LR would only take up 100 megs or so in Ram.

"only" 100MB?

The original Mac managed its GUI in 128K of RAM, and there are smaller GUIs for smaller systems, like GEOS for the Commodore 64 (64K).

So I think a low-resource GUI form of Windows should be able to do much, much better than that. Heck, even Win95 was happy in 32MB.

[Fsiphskilm]

To mak

[Link Antilles]

The lowest *I* can ever get Windows XP to go is 80-90MB. I wish it would be happy with 32MB, but as long as Windows uses under 100MB... I am happy. This is why I really hate to see what "Vista" will waste.

[Mithrandir]

The Reason Windows is popular is because virtually all Windows Software from the past will work on Windows Software in the Future. WIth Apple's OSX, don't you have to have OS9 installed as well if you want OS9 programs to work? I'm not a big mac fan so i wouldn't know how it all works on mac.

I'm sorry but that's just not true. NONE. Count them En Oh En Ee of my old games will work in XP. They ALL worked in 98. I've tried all the finageling I can, and they won't work. None of my Win 3.11 software works, and most of my 95 software doesn't either.

"The Reason" windows is popular is marketing and brilliant (if mobish) business tactic. Period.

[Arnobius]

I'm sorry but that's just not true. NONE. Count them En Oh En Ee of my old games will work in XP. They ALL worked in 98. I've tried all the finageling I can, and they won't work. None of my Win 3.11 software works, and most of my 95 software doesn't either.

"The Reason" windows is popular is marketing and brilliant (if mobish) business tactic. Period.

Actually I have gotten many Win98 only games to work on XP. The ones that tend to be most reluctant to work were the 98/2000 only compatible games. I've been able to get Win 95 games to work too.

Win3.1.1 is old enough to be considered archaic. People were using that back when I was working om my BA degree (graduated '92)

Believe it or not, some of us do like XP

[Mithrandir]

"98 Only" games probably work fine, but this is 95 software (which happenes to work in 98).


Since I *do* have to point this out, I like to play a silly little game with a guy who runs through a haunted mansion. It's on my mac. In fact, it was on my really old mac and it still runs under classic on my new mac. We're talking late 80s to early 90s software here.

Now I'm SURE this is just a fluke, but I did have to mention it....

[Arnobius]

"98 Only" games probably work fine, but this is 95 software (which happenes to work in 98).


Since I *do* have to point this out, I like to play a silly little game with a guy who runs through a haunted mansion. It's on my mac. In fact, it was on my really old mac and it still runs under classic on my new mac. We're talking late 80s to early 90s software here.

Now I'm SURE this is just a fluke, but I did have to mention it....

OK, I see what you're saying here now. I thought you were referring to Win98 games... my mistake

[Cognitive Gear]

Anyone seen the minimum sytem requirements for this?

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/winxp/VistaBeta1FS.mspx

System Requirements

Minimum system requirements will not be known until summer 2006 at the earliest. However, these guidelines provide useful estimates:
•

512 megabytes (MB) or more of RAM
•

A dedicated graphics card with DirectX® 9.0 support
•

A modern, Intel Pentium- or AMD Athlon-based PC.

Those are some pretty high estimates. That's alot of power being sucked out of my system just for the OS, not to mention whatever game I want to play on top of it.

I'm starting to think that someone needs to make a gamer's OS that takes up low system resorces.

[Link Antilles]

Oldphil: Not to get off topic, but by any chance was the game you were talking about, "Maniac Mansion"? ..'cause I loved that game. (Earlier this year, I *finally* got a chance to play the awesome sequel, Day of Tentacle.)


Anyways, back to topic....

[Arnobius]

Anyone seen the minimum sytem requirements for this?

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/newsroom/winxp/VistaBeta1FS.mspx

System Requirements

Minimum system requirements will not be known until summer 2006 at the earliest. However, these guidelines provide useful estimates:
•

512 megabytes (MB) or more of RAM
•

A dedicated graphics card with DirectX® 9.0 support
•

A modern, Intel Pentium- or AMD Athlon-based PC.

Those are some pretty high estimates. That's alot of power being sucked out of my system just for the OS, not to mention whatever game I want to play on top of it.

I'm starting to think that someone needs to make a gamer's OS that takes up low system resorces.

Yeah... but that was no secret that it was gonig to be the next generation of hardware... based on the doubling of capacity every 18 months...

[blkmage]

So we have an OS with system requirements that look an awful lot like Half-Life 2's.

[Cognitive Gear]

Exactly. Who wants to drop 250$ for a new OS and then even more money for upgrades so you can still play your favorite games at a decent frame rate?

No one? XD

[Fsiphskilm]

Depricati

[Warrior4Christ]

Ugh. Microsoft have made some bad choices regarding the new OS.

Vista -> Longhorn. Bad. Longhorn was fine.

Leaving out WinFS, Avalon, and (the other one?) of the out-of-the-box install is bad! I would prefer you take an extra year developing it and integrate it properly!!

I was looking forward to Longhorn...

[Arnobius]

You guys realize "Longhorn" was just the code name for Vista right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_codenames

Kind of interesting. Windows 98 was originally "Memphis", Win2000 was "Cairo", Win 3.1.1 was "Snowball" and WinXP was "Whistler"

As for WinFS not being in Vista/Longhorn, MS announced that one in 2004, so hardly breaking news.

[glitch1501]

i tried to tell them

[Warrior4Christ]

You forgot Win95 was Chicago.

Edit: then I visits the link...

[Dante]

They should name the new microsoft software Nova OS wouldn't that be cooler... or maybe it would only appeal to geeks like me... *Sigh*

[Arnobius]

They should name the new microsoft software Nova OS wouldn't that be cooler... or maybe it would only appeal to geeks like me... *Sigh*

The old PBS Science show?

Besides, a nova is a star that came to a catastrophic end... which would provide people with endless Windows jokes

[V8Tsunami]

Besides, a nova is a star that came to a catastrophic end... which would provide people with endless Windows jokes

[quote="shooraijin"]Vista is actually an acronym for Viruses, Instability, Spyware, Trojans and Adware. ]
So true.

My guess is it's just the same old story. MS obseletes their old software with new software that still crashes, locks up, and requires constant updates. If it doesn't, I'll be surprised.

Just my .02.

[glitch1501]

i found this interesting, its about how they are most likely GOING to implement WinFS into vista!!!!!

http://www.microsoft-watch.com/article2/0,2180,1853294,00.asp

apparently its ready to download for MSDN subscribers!

[Yahshua]

http://msdn.microsoft.com/windowsvista/
http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=92834
http://channel9.msdn.com/
Some interesting links about Vista.