Windows Longhorn? 3-D?

[Bear]

Re: Windows Longhorn? 3-D?

Originally posted by MacManiac1224
* Longhorn will include a database-like file system based on technology from SQL Server 2003 (code-named Yukon). This file system will abstract physical file locations from the user and allow for the sorts of complex data searching that are impossible today. For example, today, your email messages, contacts, Word documents, and music files are all completely separate. That won't be the case in Longhorn.

I am not sure this is a good thing.

What speed hit will this have? Oh, right, I forgot, they're trying to sell faster Intel processors also.

Why would you want to search your music files when you're looking for a text document?

You can integrate different types of document searches without this type of filesystem and the ensuing overhead.

Of course there is the fact that any disk volume with a filesystem is already in a sense a database.

 

[FattyMembrane]

Originally posted by barkmonster
Why didn't apple patent the 3D based GUI engine ?

you can't really patent the process of rendering something with a graphics card, thats what graphics cards are made to do. it would be like id all of a sudden trying to get a patent on using opengl for games. i know exactly what you mean, but it's kind of a fuzzy area, if apple was allowed to do that, it would be able to ask for a patent on running computers with microprocessors (not that it would be a bad thing... ).

 

[whocares]

My favourite part of the screen-shot: the"fix-it" icon.

Next thing you know, they'll be replacing the "Start" button with a "Fix" one

 

[MacCoaster]

Re: Re: Windows Longhorn? 3-D?

Originally posted by Bear
I am not sure this is a good thing.

I personally think it is a great idea. Search should be relational, human like. (SELECT * FROM database WHERE content LIKE ...)

What speed hit will this have? Oh, right, I forgot, they're trying to sell faster Intel processors also.

Most likely very little speed hit. Since SQL is indexed, relational, etc. It might just be faster, esp since just one user is likely to use it rather than millions of people searching your harddrive all the time. In fact, SQL Server (by Microsoft) is one of the most well-scalable SQL servers in respect with cost esp. for high end corporate citizens.

Why would you want to search your music files when you're looking for a text document?

That's the beauty of SQL. It's relational. It doesn't need to search your music files when it's irrevelant. It selects where to look at and finds it.

You can integrate different types of document searches without this type of filesystem and the ensuing overhead.

That's another beauty of SQL. Gigabytes worth of SQL database performing a simple search is RIDICULOUSLY instant, so ridiciously instant that it's amazing. Hell, even with many people searching your harddrive with the SQL backed filesystem, it will still be very, very fast. I've experienced this with web developing and corporate SQL developers who all do similar things that I do (.NET/SQL programming). That's much more efficient than going through each directory and trying to find it.

Of course there is the fact that any disk volume with a filesystem is already in a sense a database.

Yes, database, but not relational.

 

[Durandal7]

All that I'm seeing here is that Longhorn exaggerates the problems that PC users had with XP.

In a foolhardy attempt to mimic the dock and menu bar M$ has managed to take up 20% of your screen. Windoze is now even more invasive, I know a lot of PC users and XP has pushed some of them over the edge to using Linux full time. I can see even more of them using Linux once Palladium shows up.

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by Durandal7
All that I'm seeing here is that Longhorn exaggerates the problems that PC users had with XP.

In a foolhardy attempt to mimic the dock and menu bar M$ has managed to take up 20% of your screen. Windoze is now even more invasive, I know a lot of PC users and XP has pushed some of them over the edge to using Linux full time. I can see even more of them using Linux once Palladium shows up.

Nah, Linux is never going as a true desktop. If anything, they'll just switch to Macs, or Mac OS X on x86; if that's ever to be published.

Besides, what problems with XP? I've never had any.

 

[crassusad44]

Re: Wow..

Originally posted by syco
That has to be the ugliest thing I've ever seen, even surpassing the ugliness of the original Windows XP. Poop brown, sand, and sky?! What is this, a giant nature milkshake?

M$ needs to adopt a color scheme that doesn't look like a blind retard throwing paint at a wall.

That XP picture should go to the official poop thread

 

[MacCoaster]

It's amazing how you people complain about the stupid wallpapers.

CHANGE THEM ALREADY!

Honestly, most people who buy computers could care less as long as they can change it.

 

[syco]

Its not the background I have a problem with (even though that sucks too).

Ugly green (which doesn't match a thing), on top of ugly blue - the little bar with your apps. Ugly blue with ugly red icons - window frames.

Man, I'm almost asking M$ to copy off Apple some more, simply so that I don't have to stand the horrible ugliness!

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by syco
Its not the background I have a problem with (even though that sucks too).

Ugly green (which doesn't match a thing), on top of ugly blue - the little bar with your apps. Ugly blue with ugly red icons - window frames.

Man, I'm almost asking M$ to copy off Apple some more, simply so that I don't have to stand the horrible ugliness!

You can change that too! Jesus.

 

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by gorman
Let's go through this list point by point:

* Longhorn will feature a task-based (or "iterative") interface that goes far beyond the task-based interface found today in Windows XP. Microsoft has been working to move beyond the dated desktop metaphor still used by Mac OS X and Linux for many years; I explain some of Microsoft's early work on task-based interfaces in my old Activity Centers preview.

- I've seen screenshots and read about this, it's really nothing _that_ innovative.

Nope, it isn't. From the screenshots, I expect essentially Dock functionality (ie, "tasks" that are active alongside those that are not).

For those who have used Windows, you will know that the "Dock" concept (which is really driven by the fact that in OS X there is never any more than a single instance of any memory running at any time) might cause havoc in the multiple-windows/multiple-instances UI quagmire Windows has known for so long.

All in all, I really don't think Apple has anything to worry about. By the time Longhorn is out, OS X will be greatly improved over what we have now, and will continue to maintain it's technological and design lead over Windows.

Well, Apple always has something to worry about, but I don't see Longhorn overtaking the OS X usability crown anytime soon.

Also, it seems like some of the listed features were put off until BlackComb (I thought the SQL-based file system was one of these).

 

[syco]

Originally posted by MacCoaster

You can change that too! Jesus.

You can? How? Sorry, I don't use Windows Xperience the Pain of using a bad operating system.

 

[vniow]

Originally posted by syco

You can? How? Sorry, I don't use Windows Xperience the Pain of using a bad operating system.

Right-click on desktop> click 'Properties'> click on 'Appearence' tab> click the arrow on 'color scheme' and you have three choices: Default (hideous Aqua ripoff), Olive Green (again ugly but not as bad as default) and Silver (not so bad)> click on 'OK'

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by jettredmont
Well, Apple always has something to worry about, but I don't see Longhorn overtaking the OS X usability crown anytime soon.

Also, it seems like some of the listed features were put off until BlackComb (I thought the SQL-based file system was one of these).

IMHO, Windows XP is a lot more usable than Mac OS X for now, as Mac OS X has yet to bring back the usability features that once were in Mac OS 9.x and are gone now. I hope Apple is working on it. Aqua is horrible with medium processor (single 533MHz G4) with crappy 16MB ATi card; yet Windows XP is still very usable even with a once speed-king but now low-end computer.

I expect Mac OS X to be fully refined to my tastes by 10.3.

To each their own, I guess. Mac OS X has super-nice GUI, but damn, they need to work on the optimizations or throw G4... bring on the x86 Macs.

SQL-based file system was moved from Blackcomb to Longhorn.

 

[jettredmont]

Re: Re: Windows Longhorn? 3-D?

Originally posted by Bear


I am not sure this is a good thing.

What speed hit will this have? Oh, right, I forgot, they're trying to sell faster Intel processors also.

Why would you want to search your music files when you're looking for a text document?

You can integrate different types of document searches without this type of filesystem and the ensuing overhead.

Of course there is the fact that any disk volume with a filesystem is already in a sense a database.

The "abstracting file location from data" concept is remarkably familiar ... kind of like what HFS has been doing for ... ever ... Which is so brain-dead obvious of a UI gain ... gee, I categorize file "x" into folder "Y" and suddenly all the apps on my computer can't seem to find it! But then, this is also a stumbling block for Windows power users migrating over to the Mac (no way to make a file "disappear" without moving it to the trash and emptying the trash ...) so I don't know if that's really the road MS will be going.

No one really knows how "deep" MS is going to go with their DBFS. We'll probably get more clues as the release date nears.

 

[jettredmont]

Re: Re: Re: Windows Longhorn? 3-D?

Originally posted by MacCoaster

I personally think it is a great idea. Search should be relational, human like. (SELECT * FROM database WHERE content LIKE ...)

Okay, I strongly bdoubt that MS will allow SQL queries into the database. I mean, the Registry, which has been standard in Windows since Win 95, is based on a dataabase engine with an SQL front end (Jet, I think ...), and still there's no useful tool for doing an ad-hoc query.

Also, how will relational tables be arranged? Would one imagine tables as heirarchal folders, in that one table might "contain" another table, or as an entertwined relational data model? SELECT queries can very quickly become very complex when dealing with heirarchal data sets. For that matter, unless you have a decent DBA doing your database design SELECT queries tend to be horribly convoluted because the underlying database structure if whacked ... will MS trust its users as DBAs? I certainly hope not!

Really, I don't see anything like a SELECT query being abailable to us.

Most likely very little speed hit. Since SQL is indexed, relational, etc. It might just be faster, esp since just one user is likely to use it rather than millions of people searching your harddrive all the time. In fact, SQL Server (by Microsoft) is one of the most well-scalable SQL servers in respect with cost esp. for high end corporate citizens.

Note that running Windows without "Indexing Service" turned on the SQL file system probably won't imporve anything. However, the "Indexing Service" has to run around second-guessing Windows apps to see who wrote to the file system where and how that affects its index. In a true database system the indexing service would not be polling-based, but demand-driven (ie, when a change is made to disk the index is updated or at least told exactly where to look for that change in a queue). That will dramatically increase performance for those of us who like to have our file systems indexed.

So, yes, a true SQL-Server-based backend will be a huge improtement over any of the existing FS's.

 

[job]

Originally posted by MacCoaster
Aqua is horrible with medium processor (single 533MHz G4) with crappy 16MB ATi card; yet Windows XP is still very usable even with a once speed-king but now low-end computer.

I'm running 10.2.2 on a slower system that that and experience no major speed issues. What do you use the Mac for? You de-frag lately?

400Mhz
320MB RAM
8MB ATi

 

[iJon]

Originally posted by MacCoaster

IMHO, Windows XP is a lot more usable than Mac OS X for now, as Mac OS X has yet to bring back the usability features that once were in Mac OS 9.x and are gone now. I hope Apple is working on it. Aqua is horrible with medium processor (single 533MHz G4) with crappy 16MB ATi card; yet Windows XP is still very usable even with a once speed-king but now low-end computer.

I expect Mac OS X to be fully refined to my tastes by 10.3.

To each their own, I guess. Mac OS X has super-nice GUI, but damn, they need to work on the optimizations or throw G4... bring on the x86 Macs.

SQL-based file system was moved from Blackcomb to Longhorn.

Exactly, windows xp is lightning fast with little things like opening up windows and things like that. and i hear about people having problems with windows xp and i have none. i get no illegal operations and when i actually control alt delete the computer doesnt crash. and even if i do have to reboot(which i never) it only takes like 20 seconds to start up. although i love my mac and i love os x, its is quite slow unless you have a good computer. i have a dual ghz mdd and os x feels fine on there. but on my g3 500 powerbook it is slow. i mean it is stable and great to use but isnt lightning fast like os 9 and xp. if you guys are wondering why i even have a windows machine it is because of games. you just have to face it that for the time being pcs stomp the macs in games. i wish the army would port americas army to mac though, that would be great, dont see that happening at all though.

iJon

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by hitman
I'm running 10.2.2 on a slower system that that and experience no major speed issues. What do you use the Mac for? You de-frag lately? ... [con't.]

My god. Jesus. 400MHz, 320MB RAM. Whatever, it works for you.

I'd be dying a slow DEATH if I were to use Mac OS X on that machine.

Defrag? Why? NTFS is a robust file system under Windows XP. Never had to defrag, maybe once or twice in a couple of months--just making sure my system was optimal.

jettredmond: I didn't mean people actually typing that. I'm sure it can be an option, but I meant like when you type in info, select what to search, etc. the Search engine automatically forms the SQL query for you.

I've done this a million times in ASP/PHP, and it's lightning quick.

Also, Indexing on NTFS is fine, it doesn't have a BIG advantage; but neither does indexing on UNIX. Same thing, same performance--just the harddrive itself. However, an indexed SQL fs would be MUCH, MUCH faster. Differences in design, I guess.

 

[MacCoaster]

More information on Longhorn can be found on http://www.winsupersite.com/ including lots of screenshots.

Looks a lot more useful than Mac OS X's dock.

Let's see what Apple is doing to counter Windows Longhorn.

 

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by MacCoaster
More information on Longhorn can be found on http://www.winsupersite.com/ including lots of screenshots.

Looks a lot more useful than Mac OS X's dock.

Let's see what Apple is doing to counter Windows Longhorn.

Other than space-sucking verbage next to each icon, a gaudy clock, and virtual desktops, I don't see this as an improvement over X's Dock. Functionally, the Dock (strangely enough) provides everything that I've seen on the Longhorn Sidebar. From the perspective of a UI minimalist like myself, there's simply no comparison. Also, of course, you have three Windows controls (the SideBar, the TaskBar, and the Start menu) all providing essentially the functionality of the Dock (launch a program from a short list, show running applications, allow single-click task switching), and just a little bit more (launch a program from a maybe full list of all programs on your system ... assuming you've kept links in your start menu up to date with your HD ...)

BTW, some things look off in that picture. Like the "Slide Show" text and the fact that the start button and task bar are much more like XP than in previous screenshots from the same build (3683). Maybe those things are configurable and the misaligned text is just a bug (which of course never happens in MS code, right?), but I don't know. Just looks fishy to my eyes. But then, I don't know why one would go to the trouble of doctoring up such a bland image to begin with ...

 

[MacCoaster]

Originally posted by jettredmont
BTW, some things look off in that picture. Like the "Slide Show" text and the fact that the start button and task bar are much more like XP than in previous screenshots from the same build (3683). Maybe those things are configurable and the misaligned text is just a bug (which of course never happens in MS code, right?), but I don't know. Just looks fishy to my eyes. But then, I don't know why one would go to the trouble of doctoring up such a bland image to begin with ...

You know Longhorn is alpha?

Friends running the alpha, "Slide Show" is properly aligned on their computers.

The taskbar and startbutton is similar to XP because that is the XP theme. There is a new Plex theme that's the default. Longhorn actually lets you use the sidebar as the taskbar if you choose to do so.

Remember, my friend, it is still alpha. [edit] BTW, the slide show thing is very real.

 

[job]

Originally posted by jettredmont
But then, I don't know why one would go to the trouble of doctoring up such a bland image to begin with ...

They get off on it?

I dunno really...

Most MS users have waaaaaaayyy too much time on their hands anyways.

 

[RogueLdr]

M$ moving "beyond"???

"Microsoft has been working to move beyond the dated desktop metaphor still used by Mac OS X and Linux for many years"

Ahhh, M$ has been working to move beyond copying someone else's work and doing something original for many years? Keep trying Bill, cause this looks like a reorganized rehash of everything you (and those from whom you get your ideas) have done before!

The bloatware taskbar/dock that they have designed doesn't seem to be anything new other than larger icons and misplaced desktop picture and screen saver control panels. Would you ever really want to have that much screen real estate taken up by things that you use only every now and then? And before any one says that you can choose to make this stuff go away when you don't want it there, I say why put it there in the first place if you will only use it once in a while?

What a load of crap to think that what amounts to non-useful, non-necessary, M$-style in-your-face "functionality" becomes a standard interface "feature". Going by their recent offerings, M$ will probably make this the default of their new OS as well, requiring even the computer newbies to learn enough to shut it off, if they even realize that it CAN be shut off.

Perhaps, though, the "other" 95% will simply say, "WOW! Look, Honey, now 10 % of my monitor is a clock! And another 10% is a place to change my desktop picture! How convenient!" If that is the case, I am glad it's available for them from someone other than who I choose to purchase computers from.

RL

 

[Choppaface]

I'm rather discouraged to see that future operating system will be littered with rather ugly stock art built into the interface. OSX is fairly clean, though the use of the imac icon and cinema display for Displays IMO is a bit much... some of the crap in these screenshots is almost depressing. not to mention that they're normalizing the user experience into a closed set of tasks that they can then market too. I think apple and MS are guilty of this.. between apple's iapps and all the media crap that MS puts in XP. the computer is becoming less of a tool. I don't want an operating sytem that looks like a television commerical :\