Windows 7 leaked pictures - going on your mac?

[Saladinos]

http://winfuture.de/screenshots/Windows-7-Meilenstein-3-Build-6.1.6780-3500-1.html

So this is what it'll look like. Performance is said to be better - it's supposedly more responsive, and WMP has been quickened up.

Going on your mac?

[haiggy]

Nope. Not a chance.

[James17]

Quite old news :D I seen that over a week ago on Gizmodo.

[Dagless]

Looks like Vista, so no.

I'm sticking with XP.

[madfresh]

I may give it a try. I'll see what happens. But I doubt it's going to be much different than vista.

[ttech10]

I keep my Windows away from my Mac. I have a desktop PC that I use Windows on because there's still a good deal of programs I NEED Windows to run.

[Chaszmyr]

Sure looks a lot like Windows... For all the dressing it up they do, Windows continues to ooze with ugliness. It's like the concept of aesthetic details is completely lost on Microsoft. I wonder if they plan on unveiling an updated UI at some point for Windows 7.

[TuffLuffJimmy]

It'll go on my Macbook Pro when I get it. I love having Windows on my computer.... even if I hardly use it. I'm excited to see what 7 is like and what it does to top Vista.

Look at that they redid Paint :rolleyes:

[Saladinos]

Sure looks a lot like Windows... For all the dressing it up they do, Windows continues to ooze with ugliness. It's like the concept of aesthetic details is completely lost on Microsoft. I wonder if they plan on unveiling an updated UI at some point for Windows 7.

The pictures show that the UI has been updated. Paint and Notepad have Office-style ribbons (which I really like). Calculator has improved a lot, as well.

The whole UI is very blue. Almost too blue. I like the improvements obviously made in W7, but they add aesthetic details because they feel they have to (see picture of WMP's library, page 4 picture 42). It looks like it has a rash. It looks a little pathetic. It also clashes - you can have themes to set the window colour and background, so they can be earthy-green or whatever, but then you have some vibrant blue aurora thing in every window (page 11, pics 127, 128, 129).

Yes, these pictures did leak a week ago. I didn't think many here kept up with Windows news, so the pictures may still be new to them.

[QuarterSwede]

To the OP: Not a chance. I couldn't if I wanted to. I'm still on PPC!

The pictures show that the UI has been updated. Paint and Notepad have Office-style ribbons (which I really like). Calculator has improved a lot, as well.

The whole UI is very blue. Almost too blue. I like the improvements obviously made in W7, but they add aesthetic details because they feel they have to (see picture of WMP's library, page 4 picture 42). It looks like it has a rash. It looks a little pathetic. It also clashes - you can have themes to set the window colour and background, so they can be earthy-green or whatever, but then you have some vibrant blue aurora thing in every window (page 11, pics 127, 128, 129).
My biggest problem with Windows UI is the thick window borders. OS X has shown us that they aren't needed, yet Microsoft has made them more prominent in each release.


Yes, these pictures did leak a week ago. I didn't think many here kept up with Windows news, so the pictures may still be new to them.
By the time I saw them (the day of the leak) they were already taken down. I'm guessing that since this is a German site, they'll stay up for longer.

My personal take is that aesthetics aside, I like it. Yes it's still Windows deep down but at least they seem to be adding a lot of business features to the OS and the ribbon to the UI.

[Trip.Tucker]

The pictures show that the UI has been updated. Paint and Notepad have Office-style ribbons (which I really like). Calculator has improved a lot, as well.

The whole UI is very blue. Almost too blue. I like the improvements obviously made in W7, but they add aesthetic details because they feel they have to (see picture of WMP's library, page 4 picture 42). It looks like it has a rash. It looks a little pathetic. It also clashes - you can have themes to set the window colour and background, so they can be earthy-green or whatever, but then you have some vibrant blue aurora thing in every window (page 11, pics 127, 128, 129).

Yes, these pictures did leak a week ago. I didn't think many here kept up with Windows news, so the pictures may still be new to them.

...and yet, still the ugliest GUI ever (poorly) designed.

[madfresh]

Honestly, I think Microsoft has to move away from that Vista/transparency all over the place look. It looks really ugly.

Nothing about the design looks good. Sure window users will be blown away by it because they'll think transparency is an advanced effect, but it's pretty ugly.

[Eidorian]

I'll wait for a late Beta or Release Candidate first.

Who doesn't just switch to Windows Classic Theme anyways. :rolleyes:

[GSMiller]

The only reason I have XP installed on my Mac is so I can play SimCity 3000 and RollerCoaster Tycoon 2 (I'm old school). SC3K doesn't work on Vista and RCT2 probably doesn't either, meaning they probably won't work on 7 so no, I won't be upgrading.

[Me1000]

I currently have no need for Windows 7.
As a web developer I am running XP in VMWare Fusion, with MultipleIE to get IE 5-7 installed for testing purposes.

I really like what Window 7 has the potential to become, but it is way too early to say you are going to switch to it.

If the time comes that the Mac OS can no longer keep up with my needs, and Windows is ahead of the curve then I wouldn't hesitate to switch back. I don't see that happening with Windows 7.

That said, I am a tech enthusiasts and will probably play with Window 7 in the beta form, and the final version when these versions are out.

[Techguy172]

It's basically the same as vista. If it's faster then great.

[Stridder44]

Looks like Vista, so no.

I'm sticking with XP.

:rolleyes: Being a bit superficial aren't we? I think the Vista look is pretty nice (much better than that candy-land XP silliness). And yes, it does look like Vista right now. They typically do this when making a new OS (change the UI last). XP looked like Windows 2000 for a long time as well.

I think it's funny people are already calling it crap. Not having a need for it is one thing, calling it crap before it's even released is ignorance.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7

You've let us know you don't want to face the kinds of incompatibility challenges with the next version of Windows you might have experienced early with Windows Vista. As a result, our approach with Windows 7 is to build off the same core architecture as Windows Vista so the investments you and our partners have made in Windows Vista will continue to pay off with Windows 7. Our goal is to ensure the migration process from Windows Vista to Windows 7 is straightforward.

and

Boot performance
According to data gathered from the Microsoft Customer Experience Improvement Program, 35% of Vista SP1 installations boot up in 30 seconds or less. [44] The more lengthy boot times on the remainder of the machines are mainly due to some services or programs are loaded which are not required when the system is first started. Microsoft's Michael Fortin, a Distinguished Engineer on the Windows team, noted in August 2008 that Microsoft has set aside a team to work solely on the issue, and that team aims to "significantly increase the number of systems that experience very good boot times." They "focused very hard on increasing parallelism of driver initialization." Also, it aims to "dramatically reduce" the number of system services, along with their processor, storage, and memory demands.

[toolbox]

No way. I will be sticking with XP, and Vmware Fusion.

[NT1440]

:rolleyes: Being a bit superficial aren't we? I think the Vista look is pretty nice (much better than that candy-land XP silliness). And yes, it does look like Vista right now. They typically do this when making a new OS (change the UI last). XP looked like Windows 2000 for a long time as well.

I think it's funny people are already calling it crap. Not having a need for it is one thing, calling it crap before it's even released is ignorance.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7



and
we call it crap because as you convienantly showed us, its vista with new goodies tacked on. We dont take kind to vista round these parts. *lights cigarette while adjusting cowboy hat*

[The Flashing Fi]

http://winfuture.de/screenshots/Windows-7-Meilenstein-3-Build-6.1.6780-3500-1.html

So this is what it'll look like.

Actually... That is what it looks like now.

Whether it looks like that at the time of release has not been made clear. The OS isn't even in Beta yet (instead, these are pictures of Milestone 3, which is still alpha).

When it gets to beta is when things are finalized. Usually there is a feature freeze around beta 1 and beta 2. Usually the UI is beginning to be finalized, and minor tweaks take place between each beta. This is when most of the bugs will be squashed.

By Release Candidate stage, most bugs are gone and they're still looking for "show stoppers," or major bugs that would prevent the OS from being released.

[Stridder44]

we call it crap because as you convienantly showed us, its vista with new goodies tacked on. We dont take kind to vista round these parts. *lights cigarette while adjusting cowboy hat*

If by "new goodies" you mean "speed/security improvements" yes. But that's your choice. Have you even tried Vista for more than 5 minutes recently (within the past couple months) on a decent system?

Actually... That is what it looks like now.

Whether it looks like that at the time of release has not been made clear. The OS isn't even in Beta yet (instead, these are pictures of Milestone 3, which is still alpha).

When it gets to beta is when things are finalized. Usually there is a feature freeze around beta 1 and beta 2. Usually the UI is beginning to be finalized, and minor tweaks take place between each beta. This is when most of the bugs will be squashed.

By Release Candidate stage, most bugs are gone and they're still looking for "show stoppers," or major bugs that would prevent the OS from being released.

Exactly.

[NT1440]

If by "new goodies" you mean "speed/security improvements" yes. But that's your choice. Have you even tried Vista for more than 5 minutes recently (within the past couple months) on a decent system?


My laptop is a toshiba satellite 2GB of RAM, AMD turion64 dualcore

Im on my computer almost all day. I hate vista.

Startup time =/= speed in my book.
security i couldnt care less about, Ive never had a problem because im not an idiot who downloads random crap/clicks on blatant spyware.

My problem with vista is my explorer crashing a minimum of 5 times a day (i had a tally for the first 2 weeks). When it crashes once, forget it, if i want to use sound again or dont want it to crash again every 5 minutes i have to restart. Seems to crash everytime i adjust the volume, or any time i switch programs on the taskbar.

have i used vista? HA.

[sangosimo]

I need some flavor of windows on their. I like how everything is getting the ribbon treatment, but I think I am going to use xp in vmware and run windows 7 on my main box.

edit: I understand this is mac rumors, but what about vista is actually bad? It is orders of magnitude more secure then xp and alot better at using ram. My experience is only on the 64bit side but vista is rock solid.

[iBookG4user]

I won't be installing it on my Mac no. But hopefully Microsoft can make this better than Vista, it was horrible all the problems that I had to fix on my co-worker's machines at my last job. The Vista machines had much more frequent problems than the XP machines. And if Windows 7 (I still can't figure out Microsoft's naming cycle, it seems like they just pull a name out of a hat) is better than Vista it'll mean less headaches all around.

[The Flashing Fi]

My laptop is a toshiba satellite 2GB of RAM, AMD turion64 dualcore

Im on my computer almost all day. I hate vista.

Startup time =/= speed in my book.
security i couldnt care less about, Ive never had a problem because im not an idiot who downloads random crap/clicks on blatant spyware.

My problem with vista is my explorer crashing a minimum of 5 times a day (i had a tally for the first 2 weeks). When it crashes once, forget it, if i want to use sound again or dont want it to crash again every 5 minutes i have to restart. Seems to crash everytime i adjust the volume, or any time i switch programs on the taskbar.

have i used vista? HA.

Have you done a fresh install of Windows Vista without all the Toshiba crap they've added to it? My guess would be no. It seems like your hate should be directed to Toshiba, who's probably added so much trial crap, and useless crap that's infiltrated the explorer, as well as increasing start up times significantly.

Somehow, on my computer, which I built myself and used a clean copy of Vista, has never has explorer crash on me.

The problem with Vista isn't Microsoft. It's these stupid OEM manufacturers that load the computer down with so much crap that it's damn near unusable.

[Stridder44]

My laptop is a toshiba satellite 2GB of RAM, AMD turion64 dualcore

Im on my computer almost all day. I hate vista.

Startup time =/= speed in my book.
security i couldnt care less about, Ive never had a problem because im not an idiot who downloads random crap/clicks on blatant spyware.

My problem with vista is my explorer crashing a minimum of 5 times a day (i had a tally for the first 2 weeks). When it crashes once, forget it, if i want to use sound again or dont want it to crash again every 5 minutes i have to restart. Seems to crash everytime i adjust the volume, or any time i switch programs on the taskbar.

have i used vista? HA.

Well I'm sorry to hear you've had such a bad time with it. I, as well as many of my friends, have had the exact opposite experience (a good one). I totally agree with you about the security thing. I don't think Vistas' perfect, and could definitely use some cleaning up as far as code/performance goes, but your comp. crashes even when turning the sound up? Come on.

Sounds like either a very bad driver (not Vista/Microsoft's fault) or a hardware issue.

[The Awesome]

Windows user here since 3.1 (I hang around here so I'm ready once I get my first Mac :D)

I agree with the other poster about the trial/bloatware: it really does make Vista worse than it is. Add that to the fact the Microsoft also seems to make fairly incoherent/useless applications (none of that Calendar-Contacts-Email integration you get in your Macs). I will miss MS Paint, though T_T :p

Right now, Vista's not what most of you would think it is. I can't recall it crashing this September (it hangs a bit, though that's my slow PC's problem). It's not an inspiring piece of software but I get by.

To answer the poll: If I don't have a Playstation 3 before next summer, then I'll have to use boot camp on my future MBP. I'll get Vista or the upcoming 7 since XP doesn't have DX10 support (I'll only use it for gaming). Once you have more than a gig and a half of RAM on your PC, the performance gap between XP and Vista is gone.

[Stridder44]

Windows user here since 3.1 (I hang around here so I'm ready once I get my first Mac :D)

I agree with the other poster about the trial/bloatware: it really does make Vista worse than it is. Add that to the fact the Microsoft also seems to make fairly incoherent/useless applications (none of that Calendar-Contacts-Email integration you get in your Macs). I will miss MS Paint, though T_T :p

Right now, Vista's not what most of you would think it is. I can't recall it crashing this September (it hangs a bit, though that's my slow PC's problem). It's not an inspiring piece of software but I get by.

To answer the poll: If I don't have a Playstation 3 before next summer, then I'll have to use boot camp on my future MBP. I'll get Vista or the upcoming 7 since XP doesn't have DX10 support (I'll only use it for gaming). Once you have more than a gig and a half of RAM on your PC, the performance gap between XP and Vista is gone.

A gig and a half? That's it? :rolleyes: RAM is so cheap now-a-days, why not max it out? The jump from 2 to 4 GB of RAM for me was intense (in a good way). But yes, I agree with the bloatware. I blame the manufacturers for throwing this crap on notebooks/desktops, making a system/OS look to be much more sluggish than it actually is.

[fredsarran]

It does not really look different from Vista besides it seems to have a "ClearCrystal" theme. Anyway, I cannot imagine this Windows 7 to be better than Vista. Vista is crap and always be (compared to XP) and the new one as well.

[darkcurse]

I still dislike Vista. I used to hate Vista but now its just general dislike so thats... good...? Anyway, I find that if you give Vista time to boot up properly, let it sort out its thoughts first while you sip coffee for 5 minutes before delving in and doing stuff then maybe it'll be alright. The main with Vista for me now is still that its really slow and sluggish and this with 2 gigs of RAM so... If Windows 7 performs better, then sure why not.

[pol0001]

I have Vista Home Basic on my Bootcamp partition. I actively used Windows 3.1, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP and Vista. And I have to say MS made great progress with their OS. The problem of MS is, that they have to write a "good for all" OS, while Apple can focus on the hardware they sell. The experience with a tailored OS will most of the time be better, than the experience with an OS that was just thrown on top of some hardware by a manufacturer.

I use Vista because MS Office is the only serious Office Suite out there where you don't have to worry about file formats. Every Office Suite can read Word, Excel etc. And it is packed with features that others Suites are missing. I use Excel extensively for work. And I am very pleased with it.
The reason why I use a Mac at home ist that I like the GUI more and that the way OSX works/integrates it's components is more coherent with my way of thinking.

Concerning Windows 7 it's to early to judge the OS. It is still in Alpha. And remember all the features that where either promised for Vista or those that weren't included in Vista's Alpha. We'll have to wait till they release the Beta of Windows 7 to get a realistic impression of it.

PS: To all those people praising XP and damning Vista. The Windows 98 users did the same to XP when it came out. I remember some of the arguments like "unstable", "requires new hardware", "activation" and my favourite complaint "the bubble gum optic". :rolleyes: So wait another year till MS irons out the rest of the bugs and switch than. XP is a dead OS. It is just a matter of time till more and more new programs become "Vista only".

[t19880821]

i like windows. sure, i like mac osx more... mainly due to its simplicity and reliability. but really there's nothing wrong with windows and most of the problems are fixable by the user.

the whole time i have had XP installed on this MBP, i have had nearly ZERO problems. then again, most of my time on this computer is spent in OSX. but the time spent on XP has been nearly flawless.

would i install windows 7 on my mac? sure, why not? i was actually going to install vista when i got more RAM.

[Saladinos]

Windows 7 is fairly advanced as far as the UI goes. Microsoft spent a lot of time and money researching interfaces and branding for Vista. Aero is the new windows brand. You see those aurora patterns, you think Windows (that's the idea).

Windows is so widely used, that it's quite easy to develop branding. Luna (the XP theme) became a big part of the XP brand. You could recognise it at a glance and know it was XP. Aero hasn't done so well because Vista hasn't done as well as XP (from a marketing perspective).

Windows 7 won't depart dramatically from Aero. It's Windows' Aqua. Aqua's been tweaked between revisions, but between each, you could still see it was the same UI philosophy. I actually find Aero oddly attractive sometimes.

I played around with some internal Longhorn builds and demos (most of which were made in Flash. I can go over the Longhorn story if anyone's interested). Microsoft have some really smart people working for them, even if it doesn't always show in their products. Things like WinFS and the original Sidebar - they were huge. They show the kind of forward-thinking that almost makes you sympathise with their dominance.

WinFS was not just a filesystem. The computer actually knew what files where. File formats were replaced by XML schemas, and it was all perfectly integrated. You could be on a phone call with John (and the computer would know it's John, and who John is), and it'd show you recent emails, IMs, collaborated documents, and filter them by context using speech recognition. You could tag things easily from the sidebar. You didn't have folder hierarchies - you'd tell the computer to show you all photos with You and Jenny in them, in that simple language, and it'd just do it. The computer thought about data as you think about your data. Not by file names or folders, but by content. You can do this with metadata, but I consider that a 'tacked-on' solution. WinFS was built for this kind of stuff. Unfortunately running a relational database server for all disk queries turned out to limit performance somewhat, and it was scrapped.

The Sidebar was much more than a Dashboard rip-off. It was design to solve the problem of data being somewhere in the cloud in different services. All your information would be aggregated in to one place. Applications could use it, too. So in one place, you could see your upcoming appointments, web-based emails, orders from Amazon, CD burning status...etc. All the information scattered across applications and web services would be aggregated. I'm not sure why this was scrapped. I know the current Sidebar was close to being scrapped right up until release. One high-level executive had faith in it, though, and it was kept. The Sidebar team then became part of Windows Live (for whatever reason), and was eventually just disbanded.

If these concepts see some life in Windows 7, I'll buy it. I'll only ever buy another copy of Windows if there's some true technological progress.

[Stridder44]

PS: To all those people praising XP and damning Vista. The Windows 98 users did the same to XP when it came out. I remember some of the arguments like "unstable", "requires new hardware", "activation" and my favourite complaint "the bubble gum optic". :rolleyes: So wait another year till MS irons out the rest of the bugs and switch than. XP is a dead OS. It is just a matter of time till more and more new programs become "Vista only".

THANK YOU. People like to forget this. Are some of you really that stubborn that you plan on using XP forever? Oh, right, until something better comes out. :rolleyes: Enjoy waiting forever.