http://www.freeinternetsecurity.info...ild-5231-leaks

these screenshots of Vista look strikingly similar to some of my Linux desktops .... maybe they finally got it together??

Loosk like XP to me. Linux does not really have a look. I would say it may look like KDE or GNOME (Which I don't see) but I would say this more looks like Linux.

Screenshot

I like the new Vista look...

There are too many static menus, buttons, and wasted space nowadays ( especially on Linux window managers but also on Windows ) - many of these GUI elements you actually never touch, and therefore I think they should appear first when you need them.

Take for example KDevelop, if you have a resolution of 1024 x 768 only about 40% of the space is actually the code editor, the rest is more or less wasted space... Even if it's possible to remove most of the stuff by configuring KDE and the app itself, it's still a problem...

Looks nice, but not like Linux. Like KDE or Gnome, maybe. And this thread now resides in General - 'cos it's aaaaaalllllll about Windows.

I thought I put it in General? I meant to put it there - my bad.

what I meant was that it looks like with vista you can do more manipulations with the way it looks than you can with xp or pre-xp. i agree, it's still recongnizable as windows. but now it looks like you can do some (or maybe it's just that way, i dont' know) manipulations with the taskbar, transparent windows, etc. so, LIKE Linux, perhaps you can do some more creative things with your desktop and you're not stuck with pretty much the same ones as everybody else.

it's just another Windows look. Doesn't say anything functional.. all these look can be gained using some other windows tools. Anyway....

<sigh>

All Windows will look similar because they are not going to change it dramatically just like the Mac interface typically looks the same and how KDE hasn't changed in looks that much. Yet each version will always try and make nice changes while maintaining the overall similar look. As far as changes goes I think Longhorn will be more similar to linux in terms of Features.

Stability | Security | Reliability | Flexability | GNU < new look.

Is it just me, or does anybody else get the impression that Microsoft finally latched onto the "Transparency is a cool feature" idea (After Linux and Apple have had it for ages, of course) but have no actual clue on how to use it in a particularly useful way?

I mean, how does having the toolbar give a blurry impression of the window underneath improve the looks or the functionality? Are people really going to spend all the money on the high-quality monitors and graphics card Vista is going to require, just so they can have a blurred desktop?

Transparency for things like drop-shadows around windows are great - they add a real 3D quality that makes it much easier on the eye. And transparency in things like icons can be helpful, as you don't get glaring inconsistencies when you change the background colours.

But really - what does the Vista (Aero?) approach of turning the top of every window into a blurry mess really contribute to the look&feel? It looks like it was designed by a newbie who discovered a new toy and shoved it into every thing he could think of, instead of a professionally-designed, commercail desktop.

What a waste. . .

</rant>

It reminds me of that annoying toy they put in office a while back, the guy who pops up to tell you he has an idea about your document. It's funny the first 5 or 10 minutes. After that you spend 10 minutes looking for a way to disable this irritating, useless and resource consuming garbage. It's like GNUeyes. Nobody uses it for more than 10 minutes.

Here we have pretty transparency and blurring effects. Many people will find it cool and they will buy the product because it's fresh, especially those who are newbies to computers. They will play around customizing their desktop, learn some stuff about clicking and browsing. After that they will wonder what they can do with their computer. Many will stick to MSN for a month or two before they let their comp take the dust. Those who value their money will do some productive things with it, starting with disabling the annoying toys and installing some useful apps. If they dig a little and try to go further, they will soon start to be frustrated by all the limitations and install an OS that let them do what they want from it.

It's infortunate that newbies have to pay the M$ tax for an introduction to computing.

All way too bloated up if you ask me. Have you seen the vista requirements? A minimum of 512MB Ram is required (That's a lot for a minimum requirement to be honest), 100MBps Ethernet card, an "advanced processor", a 3d Graphics acceleration..

Sheesh, Linux runs on crap hardware..

-A

Thats what I still love about linux.

Redhat 9 ran fine on my K6 @ 200Mhz with 64 megs of ram. Ran X windows on it, had all the regular junk installed. It was fine.

Windows vista looks like it needs SLI 7800's or something just to render the desktop. When the os comes to a point where it uses more resources than a good modern 3d game... something is wrong.