Vista video
Vista video
http://www.myass.dk/WindowsVista-800x600-Pixels.swf
It lasts forever. I think they should fix the little search prompt on the start bar. Currently it just searches the start menu. If they made it search the entire system, it would be useful.
It lasts forever. I think they should fix the little search prompt on the start bar. Currently it just searches the start menu. If they made it search the entire system, it would be useful.
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
Gotta be honest there's nothing impressive to me there. I mean, there's nothing wrong with it, I just don't see how it justifies being a whole seperate release from XP.
Having said that, it's all talk about the gui atm and little about the actual operating of said system.
Having said that, it's all talk about the gui atm and little about the actual operating of said system.
"Maybe you have some bird ideas. Maybe that’s the best you can do."
― Terry A. Davis
― Terry A. Davis
-
Don Carlos
- Posts: 17514
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
-
Chupacabra
- Posts: 3783
- Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2001 7:00 am
You're right, it doesn't really look different from XP, but there is a lot of stuff going on behind the scenes that you really don't see. I suspect that GUI is just a temp job (because it's hideous). My PCI GF MX 4000 won't even display the trasculcent effects. I don't have time go to through and analyze all the changes I see, but there is a lot more there than meets the eyeFoo wrote:Gotta be honest there's nothing impressive to me there. I mean, there's nothing wrong with it, I just don't see how it justifies being a whole seperate release from XP.
Having said that, it's all talk about the gui atm and little about the actual operating of said system.
Hmmm... From waht I can tell, not only are the windows transparent and not only do they fade in/out with scale, and not only do they do that sort of slant thing whne you open/close them, but it also looks like (from what i can see) that anything not in focus (not clicked on) has some kind of blur going on...
Which is a tad pointless because what happens if your copying something...? O_o
Which is a tad pointless because what happens if your copying something...? O_o
-
eepberries
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:14 pm
-
Iccy (temp)
- Posts: 412
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2005 1:32 am
... OSX hasn't changed much at all.Foo wrote:Gotta be honest there's nothing impressive to me there. I mean, there's nothing wrong with it, I just don't see how it justifies being a whole seperate release from XP.
Having said that, it's all talk about the gui atm and little about the actual operating of said system.
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
The clear parts blur what is behind them for a reason... If it were 100% clear, you'd have a lot of accidental clicks.o'dium wrote:Hmmm... From waht I can tell, not only are the windows transparent and not only do they fade in/out with scale, and not only do they do that sort of slant thing whne you open/close them, but it also looks like (from what i can see) that anything not in focus (not clicked on) has some kind of blur going on...
Which is a tad pointless because what happens if your copying something...? O_o
There is a lot more to come. The entire Vista interface runs on DirectX 10. Everything is 3D... It's just presented in a familiar pseudo 2D format.
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
Easy. It'll have full 64-bit support, continuing security upgrades, newer hardware will run fastest on it, and new PCs will ship with it.eepberries wrote:I hate that windows explorer style start menu. Also the transparency thing just looks stupid to me. Honestly, I don't see any point in upgrading to Vista anytime soon unless there's some great feature I haven't yet heard about.
So you won't need to upgrade, but you'll want to.
"Maybe you have some bird ideas. Maybe that’s the best you can do."
― Terry A. Davis
― Terry A. Davis
It has instant searching over the entire hard drive, and nearly the same speed over networked Vista PCs... For example, if you were searching a folder of a downloaded Q3W page, as you type it would look like this:Iccy (temp) wrote:So far its winXP with transparency upgrades. Nothing worth getting yet, but hey on the upside itll be a easy upgrade test for my MCSA.
rep (rep, replicator, replicant, reply, reptile, etc.)
repl (replicator, replicant, reply, etc.)
repli (replicator, replicant, etc.)
replijajaja (no results)
From what I've seen and heard, it blows Spotlight out of the water.
WinFS is going to be released in Vista SP1. That's a goody.
When you run a game, Vista unloads... It's almost like quitting Windows 95, booting in DOS, and running a game. You get more power devoted to the game. It's instantaneous... In fact, for DirectX games, since the API is already initialized, when you open a DX game you won't have that three second mode change wait.
You can connect more than one IP to the same PC... It's strange, but logical. If you have fast internet such as cable, and multiple IP addresses, usually the cable company (since Docsis2.0 and 3.0 modems have an incredible throughput anyway) limits your bandwidth per IP... This is why if you have 4 IP addresses, each can possibly be downloading at the full 7MB/s speed because it's not 7MB/s divided by 4, it's 4 individual allowances of 7MB/s. I think my modem gets 40MB/s or a little higher. I'll have to check sometime.
ANYWAY, you can now daisy chain your connections to the same PC. A lot of motherboards already have multiple ethernet connections. Apparently with Vista it's as simple as installing another NIC and plugging it into your router, and then going into network properties and click on 'slipstream connection' or whatever marketing name they've given it.
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
Vista runs on DirectX 10. The visual effects use less than 1% of system resources. WinHEC 2003 or 2004 demonstrated this in an early early build of Longhorn that was still using Windows Graphics Foundation. DX10 is even better. I'm going to leave everything turned on. It's not like it'll matter even if it did take more than 1% of system resources (That 1% figure is actually from a CPU that was running at half the speed of what we'll have when Vista comes out.)horton wrote:well it looks pretty, but i turned off all the nice looking features on XP, so I see little point.
All i require is something stable and fast.
Edit: Since DX10 is a major part of the operating system and it's always on, perhaps this will lead to 3D finally hitting the net in a big way?
[img]http://members.cox.net/anticsensue/rep_june.gif[/img]
-
eepberries
- Posts: 1975
- Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:14 pm