Windows Vista

Lazybones · August 21, 2005, 01:24:47 AM

There has been lots of talk about what will NOT make it into the next version of windows, so it's interesting to read what will make it.. Lots of stuff under the hood, we will have to wait and see if it makes a difference.

http://www.cdrinfo.com/Sections/Reviews/Specific.aspx?ArticleId=14763

Shayne · August 21, 2005, 09:33:59 AM

Ive been using it as my main OS since the beta was leaked. The one thing that i feel i cannot live without is Virtual Folders.

Virtual Folders are simply amazing to work with and really its damn cool for data-management.

Darren Dirt · August 22, 2005, 03:50:45 PM

Quote from: "Shayne"Ive been using it as my main OS since the beta was leaked. The one thing that i feel i cannot live without is Virtual Folders.

Virtual Folders are simply amazing to work with and really its damn cool for data-management.

Virtfolders, like what OSXtiger has, I saw how handy they are, I totally would use them... I wonder if you've compared the Win version, to see if Gates allows the same kind of flexibility, i.e. dozens of attributes and criteria to determine an object is "included" in a virtfolder.

? ...Or maybe I'm way off... ?

Melbosa · August 22, 2005, 03:53:26 PM

Quote from: "Darren Dirt"
Quote from: "Shayne"Ive been using it as my main OS since the beta was leaked. The one thing that i feel i cannot live without is Virtual Folders.

Virtual Folders are simply amazing to work with and really its damn cool for data-management.

Virtfolders, like what OSXtiger has, I saw how handy they are, I totally would use them... I wonder if you've compared the Win version, to see if Gates allows the same kind of flexibility, i.e. dozens of attributes and criteria to determine an object is "included" in a virtfolder.

? ...Or maybe I'm way off... ?

What your talking about DD has been in MAC OS since 7.6, sorry bud, nothing new. Just new to you hehe. As for Virutal folders in Vista, not sure. Maybe Shayne can enlighted us as to what he speaks of (don't have time today to research it out myself).

Shayne · August 22, 2005, 04:10:48 PM

Virtual Folders is a very poor name. "Search Folders" is a much better name. Basically what you can do (and i have done) is create folders based upon search terms.

Microsoft basically shows that every file type has the ability to contain meta data, be it an image file or word document or mp3s.

So what these virtual folders allow is you to save a "Search" as a "Folder".

So what i have done is taken all my pictures and created folders for them. I have a "Banff Vacation", "Disc Golf", "R/C", "Fragapalooza" virtual folders. Now they are not actually folders in that you cannot save data to them, but they are in real time updated from the file system.

So in my above example for pictures, i have given all the pictures meta descriptions and now when i click on "Banff Vacation" folder it shows me all the pictures that have the "Banff Vacation" meta data.

Its way more then that though. The search system uses XML so that sure you can use the wizard to create nice vitual folders you can actually make them more personal by editting the XML (i bet a couple excellent 3rd party tools come out for this).

I love the ability to really make personal folders. In my MP3 drive (112 GB of music) i have 50 or so virtual folders. "Alternative 1990-2000", "Alternative Times", "Never Listened Too"..each of these folders uses the ID3 tag to populate its directory listing.

You really gotta use it to understand the genious. I believe this is in OSX, or at least a very similar version. Im not a fan of the name "Virtual" as its confusing "Search Folder" or "Meta Folder" is so much easier to understand for the layman.

Darren Dirt · August 22, 2005, 04:12:48 PM

Actually sorta not quite (I think).

I was watching a 90 minute video (QT of course

) that had the 2nd-highest Apple guy in Paris promoting Tiger, back in July of 2004. (Steve-o was recovering from cancer op) and this guy who hosted the promo show was talking about all these new things in Tiger, and the way the virtualfolders work in Tiger is def improved over old versions... Not sure how exactly. But El Gateso be playing catch up, as usual.

-Darren Dirt. Man of 2 hours sleep + Monster Energy Drink = making sense not as much usual as.

Lazybones · September 07, 2005, 12:37:06 PM

http://www.apcstart.com/teched/pivot/entry.php?id=6

More on VISTA.. the system requirments are starting to look crazy. Not something you would want to upgrade you office workstation on at this point.

Mr. Analog · September 07, 2005, 01:02:06 PM

QuoteNigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC today that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive.

Does "kiss my ass Microsoft" sound like a good response? Seriously though, I think Microsoft is trying to self sabotage this project to move to a later / renamed release...

Lazybones · September 07, 2005, 01:19:29 PM

Quote from: "Mr. Analog"
QuoteNigel Page is a strategist with Microsoft Australia. He told APC today that Vista would work best on a video card with more than 256MB RAM, 2GB of DDR3 memory and a S-ATA 2 hard drive.

Does "kiss my ass Microsoft" sound like a good response? Seriously though, I think Microsoft is trying to self sabotage this project to move to a later / renamed release...

You forgot the part about the DRM monitor.

Mr. Analog · September 07, 2005, 01:22:39 PM

LOL, oh yeah

Shayne · September 07, 2005, 01:31:58 PM

Uhh, beta 1, the unoptimized version works kick ass on an 1800XP, 512MB DDR & Radeon 9700. Those stats are totally in left field.

The video card will be the kicker, to have aero glass you need a rather high end card, but its not a requirement.

Ive never seen a larger chunk of dissinformation.

Cova · September 07, 2005, 01:55:34 PM

It's not disinformation - its blatantly obvious. It damn well better 'work best' on a system with all the highest-end components you can get in it. If it worked worse as you upgraded hardware then there'd be something to complain about. Big difference between working best, and working damn well good enough - and any system that can run modern games decently is gonna run vista decently too.

Shayne · September 07, 2005, 02:30:42 PM

So your basically saying that when it comes out in about a year, that it will run best on the best machine. Which i suppose i can agree with, as would captain obvious.

However to say that it requires you mortgage the house, and buy a new super computer, thats totally wrong.

Lazybones · September 07, 2005, 02:38:42 PM

Quote from: "Shayne"Uhh, beta 1, the unoptimized version works kick ass on an 1800XP, 512MB DDR & Radeon 9700. Those stats are totally in left field.

The video card will be the kicker, to have aero glass you need a rather high end card, but its not a requirement.

Ive never seen a larger chunk of dissinformation.

If you are not running aero glass thats yet another feature that is useless like the ones already dropped.

I'll try it but it is not sounding all that new or great.

Shayne · September 07, 2005, 02:52:58 PM

The idea behind aero glass is that the GPU handles the GUI and not the CPU like in previous versions. OSX does this with their OpenGL powered GUI; Microsofts will be DirectX.

Im running glass right now, and ive grown to like it. the transparent is sorta useless, but its nice to see stuff behind a window im typing in. Like right now i can read what my buddy on MSN sent me, even though the title bar is covering the MSN window. Useless? perhaps. I will use it though, i like it.

I think its a good "upgrade". its a shame that its not a new version, but i do agree with a lot of people when they say that its XP 1.5, in that it truely is. The look and feel is near exactly like XP, its just the other stuff that seperate it (gui, virtual folders).