New Windows: Longhorn

[groovebuster]

Originally posted by Switcher2001
All I'm saying is: don't knock it just because it's old. Sometimes what's old is still around today because it's "tried & true."

All I was saying was, that there must be new approaches to use a computer. With 2-D I meant more the way the UI works and not to have a 3-D graphical interface in particular.

I still think that we are just stuck in our way of thinking about using computers because we are used to the way they interact with us and provide their funtionality... It blocks our imagination to think of something new or better,

What I mean is more like the step in ancient times to draw paintings with perspectives and aligments, later on even with multiple aligments to put more information into the painting than normally would be possible if it would be "accurate". I didn't mean to do holographs with oil-color.

groovebuster

 

[vniow]

Originally posted by FattyMembrane


we're all familiar with the WINE project that allows windows apps to run in linux (check out www.lindows.com) and that xp can run many windows 95 apps, even though the systems are pretty different. why then do we have to run classic apps in emulation? i don't know enought about programming to speculate on the reasons, so feel free to shoot me down and label me an idiot.

edit: check out this article i found about longhorn:
http://www.osopinion.com/perl/story/19338.html
then check out the responses on the messageboard, keeping in mind that these are WINDOWs users
http://www.osopinion.com/perl/board...ck&thread=5495&id=5683&display=1#message_5683

Ah, yes, the WINE project.
I'm no programmer either but since you mentioned Lindows and WINE in the same sentence, I feel compelled to post.

WINE is never going to run all Windows programs, mainly cuz you don't have 200 of MS's 'best' engineers working on it.

The reason Lindows said at first it could also run Windows apps is to get media attention.

You make a Linux distro. Who cares?
You make a Linux distro that will run Windows apps. Then you get some hype.

You name your Linux distro.
You name your Linux distro a name that rhymes with -indows and gets sued by the other companiy whose product rhymes with -indows, you get even more media attention.

You announce that your product is being sold in the US's biggest retailer, you get more attention.

It's called marketing and so far, Lindows has done a great job of it.
It's one of those things that needs to be copied by other Linux distros if they want half a chance of getting any hold in the smal' to medium business department.

Oh and another reason why they backed off their claim of running Windows apps is one of their partners in that backed out for undisclosed reasons.

WINE by itself is okay, hardly ever do you get the full program running right and it also helps if you install the app on your Windows parition first and then run it through WINE.

As for your origional question:

why then do we have to run classic apps in emulation?

I guess cuz it's the only way.
XP has this 'compatibility mode' which is sort of an emulator, Lindows uses WINE, which is definately an emulator, and in OSX, you have to run Classic.

OSX is an entirely different OS then OS9,Just like Windows is an entirely different OS than OSX, I think that would be the reason why you have to go the emulation route.
They're just not backwards compatible, I imagine.

i don't know enought about programming to speculate on the reasons, so feel free to shoot me down and label me an idiot.

Me too, feel free to shoot me down too.

At least I tried!

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by sparkleytone
in fact, the UI for XP wasnt settled on until a measly 6 months before GM, so this POS should go through many evolutions of plagiarised UI in order to stay current with MacOS.

And the UI for Mac OS isn't plagiarised? Please!

Xerox PARC is where the GUI all came about to be! Apple simply stole their idea and popularized it.

 

[ulyssesdraco]

i still cant get over the codename.....lol...

wow... longhorn screenshots ey..... it looks so...so...so... not done yet......

 

[madamimadam]

Originally posted by MacCoaster

And the UI for Mac OS isn't plagiarised? Please!

Xerox PARC is where the GUI all came about to be! Apple simply stole their idea and popularized it.

Oh, come on, that path has been walked far too many times.

The original GUI was "stolen" (Xerox gave it to them) but the GUI has been worked on so much that it barely looks similar. While it still holds on to common concepts so as not to confuse people as well as not recreating the wheel, can you seriously say that MacOSX is navigated like a Xerox box?

 

[AlejandroGonzo]

Blatant Forgery

Look at the picture in display properties for themes. That is straight out of the Mac OS X Beach Screen Saver. THE EXACT SAME PICTURE!

(I thought it was funny.)

 

[Fukui]

Look at the picture in display properties for themes. That is straight out of the Mac OS X Beach Screen Saver. THE EXACT SAME PICTURE!

(I thought it was funny.)

No ****...
If you ever saw wixp extra-pack or whatever they call it, it has additional screensavers and desktop pics many of which are from the screensavers beach, space and forest.

I like thier new stripe theme too.

I just wish jobs would release X for PC's just to shut MS up!

 

[Fukui]

...And judging from the pictures, if that is thier " from the ground up" re-write of the OS, that sucks...

Its more like ground-up with eXtra-craP

 

[benixau]

its all about marketing

Originally posted by Fukui
...And judging from the pictures, if that is thier " from the ground up" re-write of the OS, that sucks...

Its more like ground-up with eXtra-craP

No no no no no!

MS is just copying what apple did. Apple got a lot of media attention by saying that they had started with a clean slate for OSX. MS thinks that they can do the same. The problem is that where Appple did start with a clean slate, MS is just addding more UI kiddy features to the NT kernel. Besides, after spending so much time and money on moving everyone to a multimedia friendly NT kernel, why would they scrap it all except for media attention.

like they need it .....

 

[BenderBot1138]

Weeeeelllll doggy! That sure looks like a load of "bull", but tain't "longhorns" steers?

Sorry, judges ruling on this one... the cowboy used two hands on the rope on this ride...

 

[Gaz]

Since no one else has said it but it looks like the images are fakes.

It's most likely that the UI hasn't been designed yet and even if it has it will be designed separately from the main system. Imagine trying to fix bugs if you don't know if the error comes from the system or UI.

Anyway there are lots more tale tale signs that it's a fake.

 

[BenderBot1138]

Yea, the clock is a little too close to a quick keys icon.

 

[GoldenFury]

Originally posted by edvniow



Ah, yes, the WINE project.
I'm no programmer either but since you mentioned Lindows and WINE in the same sentence, I feel compelled to post.

WINE is never going to run all Windows programs, mainly cuz you don't have 200 of MS's 'best' engineers working on it.

The reason Lindows said at first it could also run Windows apps is to get media attention.

You make a Linux distro. Who cares?
You make a Linux distro that will run Windows apps. Then you get some hype.

You name your Linux distro.
You name your Linux distro a name that rhymes with -indows and gets sued by the other companiy whose product rhymes with -indows, you get even more media attention.

You announce that your product is being sold in the US's biggest retailer, you get more attention.

It's called marketing and so far, Lindows has done a great job of it.
It's one of those things that needs to be copied by other Linux distros if they want half a chance of getting any hold in the smal' to medium business department.

Oh and another reason why they backed off their claim of running Windows apps is one of their partners in that backed out for undisclosed reasons.

WINE by itself is okay, hardly ever do you get the full program running right and it also helps if you install the app on your Windows parition first and then run it through WINE.

As for your origional question:



I guess cuz it's the only way.
XP has this 'compatibility mode' which is sort of an emulator, Lindows uses WINE, which is definately an emulator, and in OSX, you have to run Classic.

OSX is an entirely different OS then OS9,Just like Windows is an entirely different OS than OSX, I think that would be the reason why you have to go the emulation route.
They're just not backwards compatible, I imagine.



Me too, feel free to shoot me down too.

At least I tried!

And since I AM a programmer i too feel compelled to post.
WINE IS NOT AN EMULATOR. thats what WINE stands for.
WINE doesnt emulate anything, it just allows Windows programs to access the proper libraries under Linux.
And Linux is an eniterly different OS then Windows, yet it runs on teh same processor and using a few library abstraction techniques you can run windows programs on it. please dont imagine, they run on teh same hardware, if thats the case then anything is possible. MS does NOT have 200 engineers working on programming windows, they may have 200 engineers helping out with the design elements, but not actual programming.
and those colors are annoying, so are the small fonts..........

 

[GoldenFury]

Re: its all about marketing

Originally posted by benixau


No no no no no!

MS is just copying what apple did. Apple got a lot of media attention by saying that they had started with a clean slate for OSX. MS thinks that they can do the same. The problem is that where Appple did start with a clean slate, MS is just addding more UI kiddy features to the NT kernel. Besides, after spending so much time and money on moving everyone to a multimedia friendly NT kernel, why would they scrap it all except for media attention.

like they need it .....

And Apple added UI kiddy features to NextStep which was developed in the early 90's. your point???? NT is actually a newer kernel then the Mach-O Kernel that OSX uses.

 

[madamimadam]

Re: Re: its all about marketing

Originally posted by GoldenFury

And Apple added UI kiddy features to NextStep which was developed in the early 90's. your point???? NT is actually a newer kernel then the Mach-O Kernel that OSX uses.

How do you figure... I thought NeXt was used as more of a learning curve than anything else. Kind of like Apple buying Emagic... they get the previous research and the people employed by Emagic who know how to make future drivers for X

 

[trusted_content]

Originally posted by GoldenFury

And since I AM a programmer i too feel compelled to post.
WINE IS NOT AN EMULATOR. thats what WINE stands for.
WINE doesnt emulate anything, it just allows Windows programs to access the proper libraries under Linux.
And Linux is an eniterly different OS then Windows, yet it runs on teh same processor and using a few library abstraction techniques you can run windows programs on it. please dont imagine, they run on teh same hardware, if thats the case then anything is possible. MS does NOT have 200 engineers working on programming windows, they may have 200 engineers helping out with the design elements, but not actual programming.
and those colors are annoying, so are the small fonts..........

Classic is not an emulator in the technical sense either... when you load Classic, its like having two OSes running simultaneously, one of which exists solely inside a HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer). This is certainly more emulator than WINE, which just emulates the Win32API, but I doubt anything similar could be done with the Macintosh Toolbox (the classic API). The Toolbox needs full control of your box... or at least needs to be convinced that it has full control of your box (Classic).