Microsoft Longhorn

Raptomex · Post by **Raptomex** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:18 pm

I just thought some of you would like to see screenshots of the new Microsoft operating system that will be replacing XP. Microsoft Longhorn:

Microsoft Longhorn Screenshots

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24518

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 8:37 pm

I've seen some of these before, but nice page anywho!

Longhorn doesn't look like it's going to impress me. The new filesystem planed for it was pushed off, the new bar on the side looks tacky and I'm not sure what to make of the 3-D interface their planning for it. But we shall wait and see...

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24519

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Tue Mar 01, 2005 10:21 pm

They're trying to copy linux I see, linux has a nice GUI.

But in general an OS is not about how nice it looks, it's about how nice it functions. MS concentrates too much on the GUI then functionability, in fact, XP sacrifices tons of resources towards the GUI.

I won't be touching long horn that's for sure, from what I hear it will be like XP but worse... and they won't let you install any software unless it's certified by Microsoft. *Corel shares drop intensively* I smell an anti trust lawsuit the minute that thing is released.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24528

Raptomex · Post by **Raptomex** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:05 pm

So far every forum I have posted this on has gotten bad replies. It seems everyone dislikes Microsoft. yet, it has the most sold computer products around the world.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24557

manadren · Post by **manadren** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:18 pm

Wow, looks like it's filled with even more useless bloat than XP. I would've never seen that coming

Yeah, there is a lot of anti-microsoft sentiment, but it's been dyign down a bit lately, which is as much a death knell for MS as anything else. Microsoft isn't going to go out with a big fuss, they'll just fade away eventually. You can see it with longhorn, with how much it's been pushed back, how much has been taken out, and nothing incredibly innovative on the horizon.

Don't get me wrong. Micrsoft became what it is because it was the best, it out innovated it's competetors, and kicked and fought it's way to where it is today. Now they sell their products just because a lot of people don't see another choice. And as others start innovating, and micrsoft fails to, people could start to forget about the software giant.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24559

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 5:30 pm

Yeah would be cool to see that. But then, would the alternative be better, that's really the big question. hopefully yes, and I can't see why it would not be.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24561

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Wed Mar 02, 2005 7:18 pm

Raptomex wrote: So far every forum I have posted this on has gotten bad replies. It seems everyone dislikes Microsoft. yet, it has the most sold computer products around the world.

I don't dislike Microsoft. I like Windows 2003 (even though I didn't pay for it

), but I'm transitioning over to Open Source for most of the other crap they deal in. Office is too expensive and Access sucks the donkey balls for databases (OO 2 is going to have a desktop-level database, which should be good)

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24564

The Gheyness · Post by **The Gheyness** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 11:04 am

I think a new, sparkly GUI would do wonders for MS.

The masses are ignorant and like sparkly things.

They see this new 3-D GUI and they'll stare in amazement at it, smug that they have the "top-of-the-line" OS.

If their computer is slow as hell, they'll just blame it on the hardware.

And I know this firsthand from my job. We've got hundreds, if not thousands, of users on Dell Optiplex GX150's with only 128 mb's of shared RAM....and they always blame the hardware when their computer is slow as hell when it's upgraded to XP.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24594

000 · Post by **000** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 11:42 am

I'm sure Longhorn will be an improvement to XP.
I remember when tons of people were returning to windows 3.11 because windows 95 was sooooo terrible. right!

I also like linux but it has a ways to go before it gets wide spread use. Then here comes the viruses. Nothing is immune.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24596

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:25 pm

Most of the tech kids I knew were excited when Windows 95 came out. I thought it was pretty cool. 98 wasn't as cool.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24603

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:12 pm

They should go back to 3.11 style but 32/64 bit. It was cool.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24606

The Gheyness · Post by **The Gheyness** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:08 pm

I'm excited about the 64 bit version of XP that's supposed to be coming out next month.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24610

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:29 pm

From http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documen...a_fea_ejfy.asp:
"Using an emulation layer, you can run 32-bit applications on Windows XP 64-Bit Edition. However, such applications run significantly slower on the 64-bit system than on the 32-bit system, because emulation requires additional resources."

Eh.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24614

The Gheyness · Post by **The Gheyness** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:56 pm

THANKS WAY TO RUIN MY DREAMS. </3

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24618

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:16 pm

Legend wrote: THANKS WAY TO RUIN MY DREAMS. </3

It had to be done, my friend, it had to be done

But think how fast all 5 of your 64 bit applications will run!

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24624

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:42 pm

Why emulate it? Can't they just make it so it works with both?! Gee microsoft.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24630

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:56 pm

Red Squirrel wrote: Why emulate it? Can't they just make it so it works with both?! Gee microsoft.

Red, no. It's 64 bit hardware AND software, it's not compatible with 32-bit unless they emulate it.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24640

Cisco_Kid · Post by **Cisco_Kid** » Thu Mar 03, 2005 7:40 pm

even uglier than the default look in winXP, and sounds worse under the hood where it counts.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24652

Brooklynite · Post by **Brooklynite** » Sun Mar 06, 2005 12:48 am

What are some improvements that you would of like to have seen in this new version?

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24817

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Sun Mar 06, 2005 1:08 am

Just copying windows 2000 and renaming it. And maybe fix a few bugs here and there. win2k is far superior to XP crap so if they want to make something better they don't have to look any further then an OS they made themselves.

And for those who like the bling bling type GUI they can integrate it as an option to choose, but have it turned off by default to save resources. Actually if they go on with the XP crapness style, they should at least learn to have most of the stuff turned off by default, instead of turned on. It's rediculous the amount of tweaking required after an XP clean install.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24820

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Sun Mar 06, 2005 2:12 am

Mine's similar to red's idea: I think they should've taken the Windows 2003 core and used that. They can include all the gui crap as long as it can be disabled. And I still wish they'd just push off longhorn and release it and the new filesystem at the same time.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24821

Brooklynite · Post by **Brooklynite** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 2:47 am

The thing is that Windows 2000 is only for businesses. It's not as compatible with software as Windows XP.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24877

sintekk · Post by **sintekk** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 12:01 pm

Brooklynite wrote: The thing is that Windows 2000 is only for businesses. It's not as compatible with software as Windows XP.

Windows 2000 Workstation works with everything XP does, including Direct-X. Ditto for Windows 2003 Server: Although some software claims it only works on Workstation computers, you can usually modify it in some way to make it see Windows 2003 as XP. All games and software I've tried on 2003 works perfectly.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24893

Red Squirrel · Post by **Red Squirrel** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 3:20 pm

Yeah same here, with win2k. I assume 2k and 2k3 are pretty much the same only 2k3 is newer and probably has more bug fixes and stuff.

Only issue I had was some really old win9x games that did not work, such as streets of sim city and sim copter, but I can live without those. I was just highly addicted to those games when I switched to win2k so it was kind of too bad but I got over it.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24906

000 · Post by **000** » Mon Mar 07, 2005 4:13 pm

Now answer me this......Why can't they include added hardware support when they release service packs? I have had some trouble with win2000 and hardware support.

Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:1805, old post ID:24913