What in the world does this mean? XP is really no different from 95, 98, NT4, 2000, and ME... it's not a "task-based interface" any more than any other Windows was.
Whoever wrote that blurb should be a politician.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MS Windows "Longhorn" screenshots
- Thread starter mainstreetmark
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What in the world does this mean? XP is really no different from 95, 98, NT4, 2000, and ME... it's not a "task-based interface" any more than any other Windows was.
Whoever wrote that blurb should be a politician.
You just said a whole lot of stuff I didn't understand, anyone care to help me out?
(Talk loudly, slowly and use colourful pictures when you do please)
As for task-orientated Windows...I think it's one of those things that will either completely take off or flop. I doubt more pro users will like it though.
AppleMatt
Before i sold my PC a few months ago and bought my iBook, i played around with a few builds of this os. I can say that it really did not impress me at all. As said earlier it was like they were trying to take away my choice when it came down to carying out certant tasks in order to try and make it simple for the person who knows nothing. In my oppinion alot of the new features in this os are just "under the hood" features and a lot of features borrowed from other operating systmes and various desktop managers.
This release will have nothing new in it besides a few new search tools, a horrible looking ui and some messed up search features. If i gotta use Windows, lay the NT4 or Win2K on me.... I wont use anything else (on the windows side). But stick me with Mac OS X or Slackware Linux!
This release will have nothing new in it besides a few new search tools, a horrible looking ui and some messed up search features. If i gotta use Windows, lay the NT4 or Win2K on me.... I wont use anything else (on the windows side). But stick me with Mac OS X or Slackware Linux!
Certainly.
Basically, under a traditional filesystem, you have a table stored on disk, generally called the FAT (File Allocation Table), stored at the beginning of the hard drive.
If you have a file called "readme.txt", for example, the FAT would know the name (readme.txt), the path (/home/mike or something similar) the size (100 bytes perhaps), and exactly where on the physical disk it's stored. If that table gets corrupted, your files are still there but you may not be able to get to them.
What Linux's filesystem does is create backups of this file at various points on the drive, instead of only at the beginning. I imagine other filesystems do this is well but I don't have any experience with them.
When my hard drive died, the damage seemed to be only at the beginning of the disk. Linux let me tell it "use the backup FAT to let me get my data" and I was able to recover everything.
Has Longhorn addressed some really "hard to grasp" concept, like,
if one app crashes, the OS should practically always protect other apps, the computer and the user´s heart from a seizure.
If MS can factor in built-in security, firewall, virus unfriendly source code, non-intrusive help and a clutter free UI, BEFORE THEY THINK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE, then they might be on to something.
As it is at this stage of the game, it seems like a 2nd grade graphic designers wet dream with all the eye candy and then some (isnt it that show-off graphics rush that Jaguar has been criticised for?) Until they trim an ever more complex bloaty software package that is bound to put millions of PC users back out on the shopping trail, then Longhorn seems to be just another twisted M$ marketing campaign waiting to happen.
And I hope they dont let my dad see it, because he will think its brill, buy it, get completely lost and have a cardiac.
if one app crashes, the OS should practically always protect other apps, the computer and the user´s heart from a seizure.
If MS can factor in built-in security, firewall, virus unfriendly source code, non-intrusive help and a clutter free UI, BEFORE THEY THINK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE, then they might be on to something.
As it is at this stage of the game, it seems like a 2nd grade graphic designers wet dream with all the eye candy and then some (isnt it that show-off graphics rush that Jaguar has been criticised for?) Until they trim an ever more complex bloaty software package that is bound to put millions of PC users back out on the shopping trail, then Longhorn seems to be just another twisted M$ marketing campaign waiting to happen.
And I hope they dont let my dad see it, because he will think its brill, buy it, get completely lost and have a cardiac.
Ok, it's time to ask.
What do they mean "Task Oriented"? I'm using XP right now, and am not sure how this is so different than previous windowses.
Is there an equivalent windows rumors site? (microsoft watch) I'd like someone with a post count above zero to post my original thread starter on there and see what kind of responses the windows side gives.
What do they mean "Task Oriented"? I'm using XP right now, and am not sure how this is so different than previous windowses.
Is there an equivalent windows rumors site? (microsoft watch) I'd like someone with a post count above zero to post my original thread starter on there and see what kind of responses the windows side gives.
Not quite, in Longhorn you would then be able to see any of the other folders in the Quark 6 folder or in Spanky (ie Your applications, etc.)
Task-orientated Windows means that if you click on a file in XP, at the side of the window it will give a list of task to do. Simple eh?
Print this file, e-mail this file to a friend, empty the trash.
Or you could look at the control panel:
What would you like to do?
Change my display settings...etc
Instead of having to select it in a menu, it is there for all beginners to see. Steve Jobs made mention in his WWDC keynote that some people hadn't even found "get info". In Panther there is the new action menu, but it is still just a menu.
Apparantly beginners like to see what they can do at a glance. Menus don't help in that respect.
Print this file, e-mail this file to a friend, empty the trash.
Or you could look at the control panel:
What would you like to do?
Change my display settings...etc
Instead of having to select it in a menu, it is there for all beginners to see. Steve Jobs made mention in his WWDC keynote that some people hadn't even found "get info". In Panther there is the new action menu, but it is still just a menu.
Apparantly beginners like to see what they can do at a glance. Menus don't help in that respect.
That's it? I wouldn't call that a Task-Oriented OS. I'd call it a Task-Oriented file browser. And, even that doesn't help me when some application is unaware of the "Desktop" concept, and I have to go C:->Docs Settings->Users->Mark->Desktop to find my stuff. And finding how large a folder is without getting a tooltip on it would be another nice 'task'.
In any event, I've never used those things. If I ever had to email a file, it wasn't because I was looking at a file, and clicked "Email it", it was because I was composing an email already and needed to attach something.
And when beginners become experts it will still take them forever to do what they need to do because this "task-oriented" thing requires too many clicks.
I don't mean to sound elitist, but dumbing down the interface to the lowest common denominator is not the solution. Beginners will take a long time to do things either way (with the old method b/c it requires some understanding, with the new method b/c it's simply slow), but experts shouldn't have to slow down their work.
I always turn all that task oriented junk off whenever I do work on XP. It is the most annoying part of using it. They actually try to pass it off as being why Windows is ahead of the OS game over an inferior OS X? Talk about dilutional. XP is annoying enough, but if they make the entire OS even more of this, I'd want to just kick the PC whenever I walk past it.
As far as dumbing it all down, I think these people need to just learn to use the OS for themselves. I didn't become an advnanced poweruser by having the OS tell me how it thinks I can do a task, I found out for myself, poked around, and found out all the useful features for myself. How does Microsoft expect people to learn and become better, more intelligent users? I guess they rather keep them at that "I've got mail, yyyaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy!" stage. Means that they can only do or think what Microsoft wants them to and if they come out with a "better" OS a month later for 3 times the cost, they'd go out and buy it just because Microsoft says they should. I guess after Longhorn comes out, it will just be an apparent fact that Mac users are intelligent and Windows users are "special".
As far as dumbing it all down, I think these people need to just learn to use the OS for themselves. I didn't become an advnanced poweruser by having the OS tell me how it thinks I can do a task, I found out for myself, poked around, and found out all the useful features for myself. How does Microsoft expect people to learn and become better, more intelligent users? I guess they rather keep them at that "I've got mail, yyyaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyy!" stage. Means that they can only do or think what Microsoft wants them to and if they come out with a "better" OS a month later for 3 times the cost, they'd go out and buy it just because Microsoft says they should. I guess after Longhorn comes out, it will just be an apparent fact that Mac users are intelligent and Windows users are "special".
I think that the last time M$ made a big jump in the behvior/ performance of their OS was when they moved from 3.1 to 95. Since then there hasn't been anything more than interface "enhancements"
and things that M$ can brag about but truly don't do anything, like the 'task oriented OS.' I would think that the best thing for a new user to do would be to get a quick tour of how to run the computer, then have someone to call or be there when they are wondering about something. If the OS caters to their needs and simplifies how things work then the new user will never learn things that they need to to know to use windows right. There are many things that are needed when you use windows that don't get done, such as cache cleansing, defragging, etc. etc. that someone completely sheltered from the wasteland of the Windows OS does not find out about. Things that make an OS easier to use always end up preventing the user from having to learn to use the OS, instead of learning to use the simplified stuff that M$ spoon feeds them. There is one thing lacking in OS X, which is a way of informing people that permissions need to be repaired once a month. Nothing in windows says that you have to defrag and empty temp. files and update to the latest patch every so often. Having a very simple system will only keep users content and thinking that their computer is running fine and dandy, when there are 500 patches waiting, every file is fragmented and there are 5 gigs of temp. files. Simplifying everything is not the way to go. Computers right now need a lot of maintenance from the user, and no matter how much M$ will try to ignore it, it is very true.
BTW: That taskbar thing on the side is like a hermit living on your prime golf course real estate. Its a good thing you can turn it off.
and things that M$ can brag about but truly don't do anything, like the 'task oriented OS.' I would think that the best thing for a new user to do would be to get a quick tour of how to run the computer, then have someone to call or be there when they are wondering about something. If the OS caters to their needs and simplifies how things work then the new user will never learn things that they need to to know to use windows right. There are many things that are needed when you use windows that don't get done, such as cache cleansing, defragging, etc. etc. that someone completely sheltered from the wasteland of the Windows OS does not find out about. Things that make an OS easier to use always end up preventing the user from having to learn to use the OS, instead of learning to use the simplified stuff that M$ spoon feeds them. There is one thing lacking in OS X, which is a way of informing people that permissions need to be repaired once a month. Nothing in windows says that you have to defrag and empty temp. files and update to the latest patch every so often. Having a very simple system will only keep users content and thinking that their computer is running fine and dandy, when there are 500 patches waiting, every file is fragmented and there are 5 gigs of temp. files. Simplifying everything is not the way to go. Computers right now need a lot of maintenance from the user, and no matter how much M$ will try to ignore it, it is very true.BTW: That taskbar thing on the side is like a hermit living on your prime golf course real estate. Its a good thing you can turn it off.
yes, but isn't "Ease of Use" the whole Apple claim, anyways? You think MS is responding to that threat, by making Windows Easier to use?
Why isn't cache cleaning and patching handled by the OS anyways?
Why isn't cache cleaning and patching handled by the OS anyways?
some things already there in XP Pro
already there. You can also set thread priorities for each apps individual processes and how much protected memory to give
There is already a built in firewall and you can select non-intrusive help. The UI can also be made relatively clutterfree.
My big thing is you have to turn all of this "on." I'm guessing MS is assuming that power users will know how to do this and do so while newbies will need all this extra help and so they keep the crap on by default. They should just have a "power user" install option to make everything less "user-friendly" and more direct.
I personally don't give a rat's ass about task based computing. In it's current implementation it already annoys me (I have it turned off.) It's much like "Ask Jeeves"; give me boolean searching any day over that question based approach.
My main interest in Longhorn is if they implement the much-talked about database structure to the file system and OS. That would be a tremendous improvement over all OSs on the market and finally be an interesting field of OS advancement (verses adding more eye candy and making things more user-friendly which is all just crap tech that uses processor cycles and ram for no good reason) With OSs getting bigger (all of them, not just Windows) and hard drives and data files getting bigger, something needs to fundamentally be changed with file structuring (and I don't just mean front-end stuff such as the rumoured "piles" tech)
My only worry is if MS is able to implement this, at least somewhat effectively, first, it'll prevent systems like MacOS X and Linux from adopting the tech sooner and personally I'd like it to trickle down into all OSs.
already there. You can also set thread priorities for each apps individual processes and how much protected memory to give
There is already a built in firewall and you can select non-intrusive help. The UI can also be made relatively clutterfree.
My big thing is you have to turn all of this "on." I'm guessing MS is assuming that power users will know how to do this and do so while newbies will need all this extra help and so they keep the crap on by default. They should just have a "power user" install option to make everything less "user-friendly" and more direct.
I personally don't give a rat's ass about task based computing. In it's current implementation it already annoys me (I have it turned off.) It's much like "Ask Jeeves"; give me boolean searching any day over that question based approach.
My main interest in Longhorn is if they implement the much-talked about database structure to the file system and OS. That would be a tremendous improvement over all OSs on the market and finally be an interesting field of OS advancement (verses adding more eye candy and making things more user-friendly which is all just crap tech that uses processor cycles and ram for no good reason) With OSs getting bigger (all of them, not just Windows) and hard drives and data files getting bigger, something needs to fundamentally be changed with file structuring (and I don't just mean front-end stuff such as the rumoured "piles" tech)
My only worry is if MS is able to implement this, at least somewhat effectively, first, it'll prevent systems like MacOS X and Linux from adopting the tech sooner and personally I'd like it to trickle down into all OSs.
Re: some things already there in XP Pro
It seems as though Apple and MS have very different ideas on intrusiveness. On default OSX is very bossy in that it does not assume that the user knows best about memory and nuts and bolts requirements for an efficient background system. Conversely on the front end, it is very transparent and obviously is almost devoid of self generating "helpful" advice.
MS is very bossy on the front end on default, yet requires users to turn quite important background processes on.
I guess you take your choice and your chance.
I expect power users on either OS can make their machines dance, and know what to tweak and twiddle, but they are a minority, and it is the masses who should be the developers priority. After a few hours today on XP I imagine them working on Longhorn must be a new breed of Microsofty, because I really dont see how anyone can say the current herd of Windows developers are that clued up on producing a user friendly task oriented system.
My mate and I had a task - our first go at sharing files between my PB and his PC. What a fricking pollaver. Reading off the same idiot proof instructions, pictures and all, do you think we could find the right dialogue boxes in Windows. Having done it once, obviously its a doodle to reconnect, but everything on the Mac was so easy to find, yet it was like looking for a needle in a haystack on the other side of the fence. Of course you could say we were thick, so what would you expect, but we arent total klutzes and we arent in the minority. Longhorn has to be a quantum leap to make OSX look backward.
It seems as though Apple and MS have very different ideas on intrusiveness. On default OSX is very bossy in that it does not assume that the user knows best about memory and nuts and bolts requirements for an efficient background system. Conversely on the front end, it is very transparent and obviously is almost devoid of self generating "helpful" advice.
MS is very bossy on the front end on default, yet requires users to turn quite important background processes on.
I guess you take your choice and your chance.
I expect power users on either OS can make their machines dance, and know what to tweak and twiddle, but they are a minority, and it is the masses who should be the developers priority. After a few hours today on XP I imagine them working on Longhorn must be a new breed of Microsofty, because I really dont see how anyone can say the current herd of Windows developers are that clued up on producing a user friendly task oriented system.
My mate and I had a task - our first go at sharing files between my PB and his PC. What a fricking pollaver. Reading off the same idiot proof instructions, pictures and all, do you think we could find the right dialogue boxes in Windows. Having done it once, obviously its a doodle to reconnect, but everything on the Mac was so easy to find, yet it was like looking for a needle in a haystack on the other side of the fence. Of course you could say we were thick, so what would you expect, but we arent total klutzes and we arent in the minority. Longhorn has to be a quantum leap to make OSX look backward.
I have to say however Fisher Price is going to be upset with the icon for the "contacts" folder. That is a ripoff from the Fisher Price "Little People" play sets. I guess they did remove the facial features however...
Imagine your disk like a three-story-tall library, and all the covers have been ripped off all the books and most of the books have been torn into multiple parts and strewn throughout. The "Superblock" (never heard it called that ... is that a Mac term?) or File Allocation Table is kinda like the card catalog. It's an index that tells where the actual files are on disk.
You want "My Report" and the index says "go to the second floor, third aisle, find it wedged between 'History of World War 2' and 'Gulliver's Travels'" ... except more often than not it continues, "then find the second chapter two floors down between your spam email from the Nigerian dictator and your 32nd copy of the Blaster worm, and for the third chapter ..."
As you can imagine, without such a card catalogue you'd never find anything. So, if it becomes corrupted, you're SOL.
Fortunately, modern file systems protect this index in multiple ways (redundancy being the most basic).
I don't see the advantage there, though.
Sure, it is nice to be able to go up one or two or "n" levels in your file tree. How often, though, do you go "up one and across"?
Personally, if I'm going "up one and across", I'm also going down a few after having gone across. Which, really, the old Windows Address Bar paradigm worked a heck of a lot better for than what's shown here ... I mean, it is quite common for me to be going from c:\dev\myapp\branch1\project\resources\ to c:\dev\myapp\branch2\project\resources\ than for me to go to c:\dev\myapp\branch2. Yes, the "up and over" navigation style saves me precisely one click over a "just up" navigation widget, but it also costs me in complexity (there's no way MS will have both the address bar and this breadcrumbs widget visible at the same time, right? But an OS X-style widget can easily share a window with an address bar ...)
IMHO, this is precisely why the column view isn't incredibly useful (although, having the hierarchy trailing off to the left is sometimes useful, and the only reason I ever use column view ...)
If the goal is ease of use, what is up with words like "partnerships"? Sounds like my devices are having some kind of sexual encounter with my computer.