So I promised a few more Vista screenshots, and so you'll find them here. I recently downloaded the latest CTP (which is the Dec 2005 build) from MSDN and installed it on my machine. I seem to recall the install process taking a lot less time previously; this one weighed in at almost an hour and a half! Granted, this was a full install (not an upgrade) and reformat. But I was still quite surprised at how long it took.
They changed quite a bit about the look of the OS, including redesigning the task bar, and a few UI control looks. I think the look is becoming more polished, though I did find a number of areas which had bugs in them (which I promptly reported). What's strange is that this release felt a lot more buggy to me than the last one. I crashed explorer alone almost 10 times in two days worth of playing around. Finally it tried to determine whether I simply had corrupt memory or not (which it reported that I didn't). So the stability area still needs some work. However, there's one awesome feature which they've introduced (a while ago, but it's more prevelant in Vista) is that a crashed application has the option to restart from the crash. Essentially, the app retains state information from before the crash and have the option to be restarted to the point before things went bad. Of course, this option needs to be turned on by the programmer, so not every app supports it. But it's still a nice idea.
So explorer got a new look:
That's the view of the recycle bin, though all folders and files have a similar view. The folder or file icon is displayed in the lower-left of the window along with other pieces of information in that bottom section. Something interesting to notice is the new window type -- there's no application icon in the upper left of the window, even though there are system buttons in the right. Also, the browser buttons and address bar are a part of the window frame itself.
As I said before, the start menu and start bar got a new look and feel:
The taskbar itself was cleaned up a bit. It got a new windows logo for the start button which looks snazzier than the old one, and it has a bit more eye candy. I was pleased to notice that they took my suggestions at PDC on ways to improve the accessibility of the start menu itself (it has a more unified navigation system).
Well, it's official. I'll never get anything done anymore. They put mahjongg into the OS.
They also added a nice chess game and something strange called Purble Place. I didn't try that one out; I'll savor that moment later. :-P One interesting feature is that the games go out and seek their ESRB rating and display it in the lower status area. Since I don't have a game selected, you can't see that from the screen shot. But it's a pretty interesting concept for parental controls. You can go into a control panel and set the ESRB rating for an account, so your kids are locked out from playing games with ratings you don't approve of.
That's all the shots for now, but as I take more, I'll probably post more.
wow! high-res icons and smoother windows with tools included in the window frame. where do they come up with these crazy revolutionary ideas?
I don't get how it still has those butt ugly yellow folders. They fiddle with making some really ugly translucent windows, but they don't change a few simple icons. That's the first thing I see - makes me puke.
The same place Apple came up with the crazy idea of getting a truly multi-tasked operating system, a journaled file system, the combo box, full keyboard access, the dock and other crazy revolutionary ideas.
If you want to start a flame war about which OS is better and why, go somewhere else. I'm not really interested in hearing about it.
@Seth -- the icons are nowhere near complete. I honestly think they're placeholders of sorts. The start menu shows a ton of flickering and aliasing when you mouse over the icons in it. Still needs more visual polishing (remember, this is pre-Beta 2, so there's time for adding visual enhancements; icons are easy to change out).
Honestly though, the color doesn't really bother me. I have plenty of physical folders sitting around that are the same shape and color. :-P
Not to mention:
- The alias arrow is huuuuuuuuuuge
- The green algae look is a big turnoff to me. Is that easily changeable?
- The light gray menu bar, blue green bar, then light gray bar at the top of the menu bar just doesn't look right. It's too big off an eye sore. "Hey hey!!! Look at me!! I'm greeeeeeeennnnnn!!!!!!"
- Is that funny light blue square behind correct.jpg supposed to be the selection in the window?
- Why is bar at the bottom of the window so ridiculously large? Is it supposed to be the most important part of the window or what?
I don't understand how they can have these good ideas (shiny stuff that just looks better) but then just turn it into a bunch of mess.
I like the new Start menu though.
The alias arrow is because the old one is damned hard to see (I know I've missed it on a number of occasions), and really doesn't bother me.
I agree, the color scheme is less than stellar, but that's why they have different themes (though you'd think they'd pick a better one for the default).
The light blue square is the selection color.
The bar at the bottom usually shows a lot more information, and it does have a lot of important stuff. File comments, rating, extra info, etc.
a new drop will be on MSDN soon... I guess they really beefed up the UI framework (WPF) performance quite a bit...
Interesting. Thanks for sharing these. I really hope that they are looking into some "ease of use" changes. I don't mean more cartoon dogs sitting next to the search box and paperclips tapping on my screen. I mean consolidating controls and system information in a single place. Perhaps an intuitive GUI for the Registry, or better yet, a less convoluted way to deal with permissions.
I use Windows but spent years on the Mac (til '98) and, despite these constant implications that Apple is Microsofts southern research institute, I see a real gap in some areas and *wish* that they would borrow more (although I don't want the file menu locked to the top of the screen - yech). Mind you I'm not trying to start an OS war - I'm simply advocating to get the best of both worlds.
Recently (December-January) I made a linux partition and installed KDE. Then changed to gnome and was very impressed. I almost wish we could customize Windows like Linux. I would definately go for the simple gnome interface. Despite what Linus thinks!
~joe
Not that I use it, slightly too cluttered for my taste (why can't I remove the drop stack?!) but nicer looking than Vista IMO.
http://www.freaksw.com/temp/PathFinder.png
In the future, would you mind posting the screen-shots in PNG? It is harder to see the details with all of the JPEG artifacts.
My impressions are that it is not visually complete, and in fact it seems to be that the individual elements are fighting for dominance instead of smoothly being integrated into the whole design. I like the design of the TaskBar the most, but I am not sure about the black color base. It would be interesting to see the TaskBar in silver instead (which would blend in better with the Explorer window style).
One thing is for sure... because the style is full of gradiants, it will be easier to make custom made controls in REALbasic that blend in with the appearance of both OS X and Windows Vista. I am curious... does Windows Vista have the "Classic" style theme like XP?
@Jake -- thanks for the update
@Phil -- yup, there's the old 98 style classic theme. Not certain if there's an XP blue bubble theme or not (I'd imagine there may be one though).
@Phil -- the images are links to the full-res ones. I don't see which artifacts you speak of (and I resist PNG only because it's not supported in all browsers on all platforms).
Aaron: I see the JPEG artifacts loud and clear. Try GIF, perhaps. Silly rabbit--JPEG is for photos! ;)
I love the Start menu and taskbar theme, but the rest of the interface doesn't appeal to me very much.
Well I mean "Classic" as in the 98/2000 theme, not the XP Theme.
It is true that not all browsers support PNG, but I would think that most users who read your blog would have a browser that is compatible; at least as long as you don't use transparency (PNG's with alpha mask) which isn't suppose to be 100% compatible until Internet Explorer 7.0 is released to the masses. =)
GIFs have their own set of problems and don't work well with Windows Vista and OS X screen shots.
Or the JPEGs could be saved with "High" quality which would reduce the artifacts.
I must be getting old, I don't see the artifacts. :-P But I'll save as PNG from now on; it's a standard option in MS Paint in Vista (and the default option as well).
I saw some interesting preview on DL.TV. I like the way the start menu looks now. The parental controls were very interesting.
I thought we were going to see some RB on Vista screenshots!
@Aaron: You mean PNG isn't supported in Internet Explorer. Every other browser I know of works with PNGs just fine. :)
Oh, and @Aaron: If you can't see the artifacts it must be because... n/m...
@Christian -- perhaps later
@Seth -- and since IE still commands a fairly large chunk of the browsers which visit my site (#2, right behind FireFox users), I should provide a way for them to view the images as well.
@Aaron -- I believe that Internet Exploror 4.0 and higher will display PNG images... they just have bugs in displaying PNGs with transparency. Since a screen shot has no transparency, they will display just fine in the PNG format.
I know. Just poking fun.
They're supported in IE 7 though, right?
Here is allegedly feb ctp:
http://www.pcmag.com/slideshow/0,1206,l=&s=26945&a=171997,00.asp
Can you confirm?
Looks nicer.
Actually, I can't confirm. The only CTP I've seen on MSDN is 5270. But when the next CTP is dropped, I'll be sure to grab it and play with it.