Meh.

I thought it was going to look a LOT more different than XP. Some of the new stuff seems cool, but overall it's just kind of meh.

No version of windows is going to look dramatically different from another as most windows users are used to the look. Coincidently, most windows users wouldn't know wtf to do if it was slightly different at all.

Looks pretty sharp, dunno if I'm gonna be upgrading or not though. Doesn't look like they've added much I can't live without from those shots.

These are things I may or may not have noticed if I have happened to have gotten my hands on Vista, which I may or may not have. Who knows.

- The Start menu is changed significantly. First we have the search bar. When you type in it, the recent programs pane changes to a search result pane that finds as you type. Nifty.
- The All Programs button does not activate a fly-out menu. Instead it replaces the recent programs pane with a treeview of the program listing. I think I'd like that.
- Windows Explorer is also changed significantly. Before we had a task list/preview pane on the left when folders were not displayed, now, reguardless of folder pane status, we have a very slim task bar on top, and a preview pane on the bottom (both can be toggled, the preview pane can be moved to the right as well).
- In non-detail views, Explorer still shows column headers, so you can sort by them. Nifty.
- Grouping and sorting in Explorer is appears much more versatile, you can specify filters or something.
- The folder treeview has a cool bitmap for the selected folder highlight instead of the standard solid color box.

I might get screenshots from this supposedly existing copy of Vista, but my possible exprience of it might have come from a PC emulator running on my current XP install, which could have possibly been so slow as to make Vista useless. Maybe. If I partition a few gigs aside for Vis... Linux, I might take some screenshots... from Google Image of course! I don't have Vista, you understand.

My annoyance with Vista comes from where they put the File/Edit/View/etc bar, THAT GOES ON TOP DWEEBS

*Gasp* Window Blinds! Or actually, Window Blinds divided by 48! This is definitely worth my hard earned money.

Most of Vista's changes aren't aesthetic. If the only reason someone upgrades is for the new interface then they suck @ life.

Spew out all the excuses you want on why Vista will suck, but none of them will hold true and you will end up upgrading and eventually probably like it. Same thing happened with XP.

Making it look similar isn't a bad thing.

Meh, it probably wont live up to my expectations, but I'm looking forward to it.

translucent recycle bin!!!1

What was the news about that video restrictor thing again?

I remember pages and pages of "omg more like windows fisher price edition lolz im too 1337 for teh XP"

I like the new theme, I'm not saying I'm going to like the OS. But I actually LOVE the style..

I admit, I am not a unix/any linux/BSD/whatever user.

I admit, I like Windows XP.

I admit, I like the GUI Windows Vista has.

I admit, Windows still sucks.

I'm guilty for being a hypocrite.

Reminds me of OS X.

You guys heard that some guy got OSx to run on x86 hardware, right? I find it amusing
http://www.uneasysilence.com/os-x-proven-hacked-and-running-on-an-ordinary-pc/
link!

Heh

OS X for Xbox?

I fail to be impressed by any of that.

About the only reason I'm using XP at ALL right now is for compatability issues. Otherwise I'd still be using Win2k.

I love how their search icon is virtually EXACTLY the same as Spotlight's in Tiger. The only difference is it's turned the opposite direction and is blue instead of white on blue. Then again though... how many ways are there to simply indicate "search"? Meh.

I like the virtual folder idea; as well as being able to specify keywords for files. That should make things a bit easier for the user.

But most of the stuff they're showcasing doesn't look like anything new. And Vista is still a crappy name.

You know, I seriously doubt I'll upgrade. Heck, my main workstation is a Windows 2000 machine and I love it. On my laptop I almost exclusively use Ubuntu Linux. In fact, when I get some time and I'm not lazy, I'm going to reformat both machines, making the laptop linux exclusive and the desktop windows exclusive (getting rid of the Debian partition I never use). As to those that say they upgrade to XP for compatability issues, I've never, ever had a problem. And I have a rather sizable game library, both new and old, to test things on.

You're not the typical computer user though. Most people will get this when they get a new computer and be completely happy with it.

There are ALOT of things I like about XP, however there are many things I downright despise.

I'll end up acquiring it myself. I'm not one of those "OMG M$ WINDOZE R TEH SUX!!!1 LINUX RULZ N00BS!" I used to be then I grew up. Windows has its flaws just like every other piece of software made. I don't know. I see nothing really substantial from the screens. All it looks to me is just some touch ups to Windows XP and more MacOS X-ish looking icons/skins.

I'm going to try really hard not to get it.

Keep in mind that whistler beta 1 (whistler was xp's codename, as longhorn is vista's) looked a lot like 2000 and had a UI that didn't go into the final product. Same here.

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/whistler_beta1.asp

They've already said this UI won't be shipping with the final product, and that there will be more to come.

If it has classic 98-like view like XP, I'm all for it.

Could you elaborate? Did they finally add symbolic links of some sort? Those would be incredibly useful.

screenshots look good, but thats not all...people are saying even with the beta, startup times are 50% quicker, program startup's are 15% quicker....I'd get it just for that...

everyone seems to keep forget, this is still just a Beta...

does look at lot like OSX though...but then thats a good thing I think.

Also installing programs that requires a restart is cut by 50% too.

... but it still won't run Syndicate or Syndicate Wars.

Long live '98SE!!

Also remember that Microsoft views Betas differently to everyone else. Most companies use a beta to mean it's basically finished it just needs bugtests/fixes/whatever, Microsoft uses betas as a kind of "here's a bit of an advanced preview but there's still loads more to add".

There's already symbolics links, sort of. You can use Shell Instance Objects. Here's a link to a program that does it: http://www.tropictech.de/modules/wfdownloads/singlefile.php?cid=1&lid=5/

Also, one other interesting thing about Vista that I learned ENTIRELY from screenshots. Yup. :em321:
- Thumbnail views of folders is now automatic (at least in tile view) and instead of the XP view it shows the folder as normal, but it has "papers" sticking out of it, each paper has one of the images inside the folder printed on it. It looks cool.

Aye, aye... I would also like that. And to speak the truth, I don't see why not. A small investment that would make lots of people happier.

This virtual folder thingy sounds useful; that's not in any other version of windows, is it?

No, it's not GoY. Also, Vista is completely customizable from within Windows, so complaining about the look is well...pointless.

Sure it looks nice, but what about all of the file access and permissions and Windows deciding what files I can use and when. People have been making threads about it and complaining for months. Can we just turn off all of these "features"?

What file access and permissions? Windows controlling what you can and can't use? What?

I love how one of the screenshots has a Mozilla Firefox icon on the desktop.

It's because this guy downloaded it and submitted the screenshots, not Microsoft.

I can read, Anovis. I still find it amusing.

Hmm...whatever floats your boat.

/shrug