This thing has been posted in the OS forums already. You guys should get out of OT and venture into other forum areas more often.
I see a couple of people saying that the would be cool, but I can't run my apps with it. That means that you would want all this stuff happening with Win Vista as well, but then there are some other people that are also saying that eff that, Windows needs to be kept plain and simple.
It's like this guy on /. posted: you need eyecandy for people to not only upgrade, but also distiguish your products.
If it wasn't for "eye candy" people would still be driving around in model T Fords but with navigation, radio, mp3 player, abs, esp and what not.
Also, in a previous thread, in OT, somebody said the FF 2.0 was out, and one of the first comments that somebody made was (paraphrased): waaahhh, it doesn't look any different, why should I upgrade. Again, it's the same point here, if you don't make something, externally, nobody will buy it just because it's only better internally.
/post
I see a couple of people saying that the would be cool, but I can't run my apps with it. That means that you would want all this stuff happening with Win Vista as well, but then there are some other people that are also saying that eff that, Windows needs to be kept plain and simple.
It's like this guy on /. posted: you need eyecandy for people to not only upgrade, but also distiguish your products.
If it wasn't for "eye candy" people would still be driving around in model T Fords but with navigation, radio, mp3 player, abs, esp and what not.
Also, in a previous thread, in OT, somebody said the FF 2.0 was out, and one of the first comments that somebody made was (paraphrased): waaahhh, it doesn't look any different, why should I upgrade. Again, it's the same point here, if you don't make something, externally, nobody will buy it just because it's only better internally.
/post
If M$ tried to put all that stuff in Vista it would come out in 2014.
Oh yeah, it would also require 4GB of RAM......
Oh yeah, it would also require 4GB of RAM......
It looks very nice, however it's not exactly useful. Just a lot of eye candy I'm not going to see because I don't spend much time on the desktop moving windows around.
I don't mean to troll, I just don't get much out of that, but I'm someone who still likes the command line interface
I don't mean to troll, I just don't get much out of that, but I'm someone who still likes the command line interface
Yep. I very much doubt that I'm going to go to Vista. I'll run XP until Linux is hotness for compatibility, within a certain limit.
yhelothar
Lifer
- Dec 11, 2002
- 18,409
- 39
- 91
I don't really get it. What's so exciting about it? It looks like useless bloat to me. Why do you need your windows to move like that? Why would you want multiple desktops on a cube? Seems useless.
Form over functionality FTL!
I bet if it was vista, everyone would be talking about how bloated and useless it is.
Form over functionality FTL!
I bet if it was vista, everyone would be talking about how bloated and useless it is.
mrSHEiK124
Lifer
- Mar 6, 2004
- 11,488
- 2
- 0
Eww, bloat++
And I'll say the same about Vista, not only is that visual bloat, but it uses 400MB+ RAM on FIRST BOOT. Until MS can get it down to the ~100 of XP, I won't get it, as I only want it for DX10/HD-DVD/BluRay compatibility.
<-- Runs Windows XP in "Classic" appearance mode and will damn well do the same for Vista.
And I'll say the same about Vista, not only is that visual bloat, but it uses 400MB+ RAM on FIRST BOOT. Until MS can get it down to the ~100 of XP, I won't get it, as I only want it for DX10/HD-DVD/BluRay compatibility.
<-- Runs Windows XP in "Classic" appearance mode and will damn well do the same for Vista.
It ran smoothly on a PC with 256MB of memory, which vista wont even install on...
So... yeah...
The thing is its cool features, and doesnt require a quad core cpu with 4GB of ram.
the "cool features" are purely visual... who cares about visual crap and watching 5 videos all at the same time? i want my OS to be stable and stable only.
That's nice and all but I don't see most of that as being useful at all. Scaling separate windows so they don't overlap is useful but the rest of it seems like eye candy.
If you don't think its cool then you don't have to bash it and act like its so terrible to have a nice looking interface.
Are you people also the ones who complain about cars like Porsches and Ferraris existing since any car will get you from point A to B and you can get ones that are more efficient at doing so?
Where's the harm in wanting to have a slick look to your computing? There's plenty of other OSes that appease your needs, so its not like you're being left out in the cold.
13Gigatons
Diamond Member
- Apr 19, 2005
- 7,461
- 500
- 126
im not bashing it. im just saying that visual effects are useless. does the slick loook comes along with great performance, compatibility, and stability, nobody knows. so how can a video with a bunch of zig zagging transparent windows demostrate an OS to be great?
a 89' hyundai excel with 19-inch chrome rims, quad exhausts, 18 LCD's and a 30000W stereo is still a hyundai excel. it's still a steamy pile.
not that im bashing that OS. but some videos with visuals does not prove that it's a nice OS, which a lot of people in this thread are getting so excited about.
ok. When will i be able to download this? it looks too cool. i'm not much of a gamer anymore and i can care less about my windows apps not working. i can do everything i want with linux as i can in windows.
I concede your point. Its impossible to tell how it would perform in the real world, and how useable it would really be.
To some, myself for instance, the user interface is a big part of liking an OS (I guess we've started to become spoiled by how relatively stable XP is to its older siblings, well maybe not 2000, but its still a lot better than 98 which more people I know used until they got XP). It sounds like you use your system differently than I use mine. I would personally find the rotatable desktop to be useful, as well as some of the other features. I know I can use virtual desktops and things like that and get that functionality now, but its not as slick or simple as this seems to be.
At the same time, system stability isn't really something you can show (its more you just don't show instability), and so for most people, if it works, it works and thats all they care about.
Oddly enough, I'm not a fan of MacOS, even though its got a nice interface and has pretty good stability.
For some reaosn this just looks like something that I'd find useable, and it looks great.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter