2 adamdawg
I guess this is the only operating system that you ever saw?

I stand firm with my opinion that this is by far the ugliest operating system I've ever seen.

The sidebar looks like a ripoff of Apple's Dock.

The rest of the computer just looks like WinXP with some elementary mods added in (transparent taskbar, transparent window tops, and a "slick" black skin).

Vista is a waste of my time.

Does anyone know if there will be a Vista version of Media Centre?

the minute you right-click or head anywhere apart from "my documents" ant it looks and acts just like XP again! That is that part that would stop me from purchasing Vista. Fortunately we have seen a lot of change lately from the original Alpha's and concepts, but Microsoft is really going to have to get its A into G if this is going to be a real success story.

It looks real cool
The Aero theme makes it all
The new UI and Aero theme together makes the screen looks brigther
Did you guys notice the new start icon ? You can check that from Digital Locker image

http://www.msvistablog.net/

In a couple of years we'll all be using OSX anyway...

Because....

....of it's massive hardware support?

....it's massive software support?

....it's overwhelming market-share?

....it's corporate enterprise server appeal?

Yeah, in your wet-dreams, maybe. I prefer fantasy over reality too, man, but come on, you have to wake up sometime.

Ugh! You guys sure are easily impressed.

Isn't anyone else bothered by those obnoxiously harsh colors on the Sidebar screenshot? Even Linux designers know how to make a colorful yet unobtrusive GUI. MS still insists on assaulting our eyeballs with their oversaturated, glaring version of "pretty". The kindest thing they can do for us users would be to make the shell customizerable so that we don't have to purchase 3rd party products in order to make the O/S look the way it should in the first place.

Looks aside, I'm hoping that the final product has more going for it than the screenshots suggest. How about a user customizable context menu, easier networking, better driver and codec support (auto downloading that actually works), better use of multi monitor setups, better/easier auto backup options, etc.

It's gonna take a lot more than a change to the GUI to convince me to overlook the inherent limitations they're imposing via DRM and purchase yet another OS.

Damn. Another Linux fanboi.

Your complaints about Windows: GUI, Context menus, networking, drivers, codecs, multi-monitor, and backup.

Dude... Take a look at how well your fav OS supports these, eh? Tell me how it does a better job, seriously.

What a joke.

GUI? Linux doesn't have a built in one. It uses a 3rd party shell to achieve it.

Context menus...Linux wins that one, but Windows context menus *are* customizable, you just have to know how, and yes...it's a pain in the ass.

Networking could not be easier in Windows. Plug it in and run a damn wizard...this works for 99% of the userbase. Linux networking support? I'll let you know when I stop laughing. Ease of use is simply not in the Linux vocab, dude.

Drivers... Not MS bag, baby. They cannot possibly be expected to make drivers for the billions of devices grandma and grandpa will naively throw at it. Not Linux's bag either, the drivers are supported by the community. Mac is the only OS that wins this one.

Codec support? Windows = download a codec-pack. Linux=Can't say...never been that masochistic.

Multi-Monitor support is driver-based, so again, it's not Ms problem.

Backup is a 3rd party tool. A basic one may have been included in some MS OS versions and they are working on a new one (for businesses). backup support in Linux? BAsed on the distribution, it may or may not be installed, and then God help anyone who tries to configure a scheduled backup for a Dell DLT Drive.

I agree that DRM sucks, but Windows is an OS for the massess. The Massess pirate, raise prices (by encouraging lawsuits and draining funds form the record labels), and disrtibute content illegally. The only way to lower prices again is to make sure it cannot happen, which menas putting heavy DRM in the massess OS.

Reality sucks, don't it?

Folks will stick with XP as long as the content they use is supported. When masively DRM protected content becomes the norm, they will switch. There's no alternative. You won't be able to view it in Linux, or on the Mac...unless Mac and Linux begin supporting it.

Sorry, dude...You'll be using Vista, it;s a virtual guarantee. I hate the idea of being forced into this crap, too, but I'm not gonna fool myself into thinking it ain't gonna happen.

The article says 'The version distributed to attendees does not include the new Windows Sidebar', even though the picture shows the sidebar and it was mentioned at PDC. Do you think they are going to drop the sidebar out of Vista before they release it? If they do, that would make this upgrade a complete waste for me. The 2 things I have been interested in are WinFS and the sidebar (because it looks useful).

Lots of peeps are stressing over the speed.

2 things:

1.) It's beta, they have a lot of tweaking to do yet, the debug crap is still there.

2.) Disable aero (use classic desktop) unless you have a 256MB vid-card or better. This is the biggest bottleneck in Vista right now.

I have Vista 5219 running on my Athlon 1Ghz 512MB system right now. With my 256MB GF 5700FX it is running as fast, if not faster than XP and I have all the default services/Aero desktop enabled.

Keep in mind... my system is *below* the minimum specs for Vista and is running great.

What a bloated disaster this is going to turn out to be. I already tried the beta 1 and was stunned by all the services that run by default.

Going to need a 5 Ghz dual core system with 2 gigs to run it as fast as XP. Of course the use of a decent video card is also needed to get the most out of it.

The worst part is they still have lousy Open Save dialog boxes. I would prefer they used the ones from Office 2003.

Oh well at Windows XP can be used for a couple years before it gets to old and they are porting some of the cooler Vista stuff for Windows XP.

This looks freakin' sweet, but I agree... with all this stuff we're going to need one kick-*** system to handle it. Oh well, I can't wait...

haha. Same here.

I think a decent video card is the kicker.

My below-spec system runs it as well, if not better than XP when using a GeForce 256MB 5700 FX (Athlon 1Ghz, 512MB).

If it wasn't for the driver issues, I'd be using it as my default OS.

Again, runs great for me on 1Ghz, with 512MB. A good video-card is a *must* unless you disable the glass-effects.

You need a decent vid-card. Runs great on my 1Ghz system.

256MB GeForce 5700FX...not even top of the line.

Runs Vista w/ Glass and default services just fine, if not faster than XP.

I think the aero interface right now is the kicker. Try using the classic interface and see if the speed increases for you.

You should not need a 256MB video card to run a desktop. Systems are still being sold today with 256MB of system RAM, and integrated video. You can play almost any of today's games with a good 128MB video card. Why should a shell require more?

I am sure any remaining systems being sold with 256MB RAM will *not* be sold with Vista installed.

Or, at the very least will be sold only with the 'starter' edition.

i agree PC_Tool,

if i could get my Modem and scanner to work on Vista then i would have it as my default OS dispite a 64Mb Graphics card, 512Mb DDR Ram and an Athlon 64 s754 3000+!

It's looking very nice indeed. I love the glass effects and the bar is looking very nice.

I haven't tried the beta yet. From the screen shots it looks interesting. I'm sure the graphics will be cleaned up some and made more uniform to one another etc.

I am a little disappointed though that we still have a start button with menu and the task bar concept. I was hoping for something new with this version. Its a decade old concept.

What screen resolution was used in the screen shots?

MarcFou wrote: " I'm sure the graphics will be cleaned up some and made more uniform to one another etc.".

Not if past experience is anything to go by. MS are notorious for sloppy / shoddy UI details. You only have to look in the Windows folder to find icons dating back to Windows 3.1. Windows icons have always been a total mess. Sure Microsoft update a few here and there when a new OS comes out, but they have never bothered with consistency throught the UI.

Now that's an OS of beauty. MMMM. Looks like they're messing with 3d windows now too. Unless I missed it in the last beta someplace? And the sidebar's back into planning it seems, which I've always liked. I can't wait for it to be released next year. Guess I better start saving for a new graphics card - my 9800 works fine for now but by the time it's released I'm guess i'll need more.