Windows 7 Beta

[stoneCold]

I had the same problem and only found a thread in a forum that suggested to use CloneCD instead, and yeah, it works.

PS: I tried Win7 and just like Vista it has nothing that would make it more usable/useful to me than XP is.
UAC messages keep to annoy me (no improvement since Vista as far as I recognized), therefore I turned it of immediately.
The new taskbar is different, but not better than XPs.
After all, Vista's/Win7's shiny-glossy GUI doesn't impress me (have seen such more responsive ones on linux a long time before), and believe it or not, I'm using the "Windows Classic" style on XP even.
The OS of my choice has to be functional and responsive, two things that Vista/Win7 fail to deliver as good as XP does.

[_tommo_]

Was anybody able to get Daemon tools working on 7? It kept asking me to restart my laptop, and eventually it went away but didn't install.

I can't even validate my games, because they can't recognize disks... i think it's screwed because they changed the disk drivers.
Anyway for now it's not that compatible, to me it was easier to switch to Vista...
but i'm anyway downloading also the 64-bit version

[Kojack]

After all, Vista's/Win7's shiny-glossy GUI doesn't impress me (have seen such more responsive ones on linux a long time before), and believe it or not, I'm using the "Windows Classic" style on XP even.

Hell yeah.
The first thing I do on any windows computer is change to classic theme. More desktop space and less useless eye candy.
I've been using it since NT 4 beta, and I see no reason to change.

I can't even validate my games, because they can't recognize disks... i think it's screwed because they changed the disk drivers.

Hmm, that would be annoying. Copy protection has a hard enough time working reliably on all hardware as it is without a new OS getting in the way.

[KungFooMasta]

The new taskbar is different, but not better than XPs.

Eh? You must be doing something wrong, if you feel that way. First of all it groups similar things together, and when you hover over them if expands a list giving you a preview of all opened items, for example all folders open. Secondly, when you hover over the expanded list, it hides all other items on the desktop, allowing you to easily find the folder you want. Also, you can re-order items in the task bar any way you want. This is just from my own experience, but even with these few items I've listed, the taskbar is definately more flexible and convenient. I don't see how its possible you can say its not better than XPs taskbar...

[stoneCold]

First of all it groups similar things together, and when you hover over them if expands a list giving you a preview of all opened items,...

That's exactly what I don't like about it, I also disable the grouping thingy the XPs taskbar does. Why should I have to hover my mouse over something to see what programs/folders are currently open. With XPs taskbar (and disabled grouping) I simply have to move my eyes along the bottom of my screen and I know what's going on.
Btw, it's very normal for me to have up to 15-20 windows open at a time (yes my taskbar is 2 rows high, sometimes 3). I would really like to see how fast you'd work in such an environment with the Win7 taskbar

[Kojack]

The Win7 task bar seems like a step backwards in all ways apart from being able to reorder items. Why can't xp or vista do that? Is it really so hard to reorder the task bar? We can reorder the start menu, reorder the quicklaunch, and reorder tabs in browsers and any program that uses tabs for multiple documents.

Grouping of items into a list is damn annoying and a complete waste of time when you are rapidly moving between several folders.

[lonewolff]

Yep, grouping is the first thing I turn off after a clean install.

[Klaim]

I'm using around 14 explorer windows, 2 Visual Studio, 1 CodeWarrior, 1 Firefox, 1 Notepad++ and all that with multiple document inside.

--> I love grouping. In Xp I always set the Taskbar to hide automatically - I don't need it everytime and I prefer to "ask" for it when I need it - that's not a speed problem because my mouse directly follow my eye - that's a UT/Quake reflex ;
I always set the grouping to at least 2 instances of the same application, keeping my taskbar very clear (but yes I have to do two clicks to get to my explorer window - that helps because I do it iteratively and I search faster in vertical lists than in horizontal ones).

So, for me the Windows 7 taskbar seems like a very big step forward. I didn't test it yet so I might be wrong.


My approach to interface changing is to not stop as soon as "it's annoying" comes to mind but just continue using the interface the way the developer tried to make me use it. I don't turn the features back to what was comfortable and I was used to before, because I might then not see the potential benefit of the change : I cannot say in few days if an interface will annoy me because I know good habits can't be set in few days.

So, if I were you, I would try to keep using Windows7 (or any other software that might have a different interface than what you're used to) in it's default setup for more time to really have a real taste of what it is about.

That said, I don't think at all that interface change is always a good thing. Only that keeping old setting on new systems might make your experience biased, don't you think?
Anyway I understand that breaking habit is loosing time (and sometime mind) so it's often hard/painful to most people.

[CABAListic]

I haven't tried (and won't, because I have better things to do than install a Windows OS beta ), but the new task bar does sound like an improvement to me. But that's mainly because I actually think that a taskbar is a retarded tool for the job that it is supposed to do. Which, so far, was to list all active programs and allow switching to them.

Why do I find it retarded? Because it doesn't scale and because it interrupts my workflow. It works ok if I've only opened a few windows. Even then I have to explicitly move the mouse to the bottom (standard position) of my screen to actually use it. Soon as I have a lot of windows open, it gets even worse. The items in the taskbar get so short I can't even read them anymore (alternatively, the taskbar takes so much space that it's annoying), and even if I could it takes time to find what I'm looking for. Grouping can help here, but it does introduce another layer of indirection in its usage, because now I have to locate the correct item twice.

So, to me the new taskbar in Windows 7 sounds like an improvement because it can serve a different purpose, which is that of a quickstart bar. Having an icon which either starts a specific program or switches to it sounds nice enough.

Of course, that still leaves the problem that I'd prefer a different tool for task management. I'm not convinced it's the optimal way, but for me virtual desktops alongside an exposé-like functionality work far superiour to any stupid taskbar. But I still think there's got to be something even better.

[_tommo_]

For me it's true that the taskbar is "stupid" for many uses, but it excels if you have few tasks to switch:
in fact the icon-recognition isn't good when you have many similar things open, because you must remind wich icon has wich program etc... and, you can't recognize different tasks of the same program, because they have the same icon.
So imo the old taskbar is needed to speed up the interface, because it can do things that exposè, the Dock, or other fancy things can't.
For example, with exposè you can't know before where to click, and you have to recognize the window you want from its layout.
The dock has a bit of the same problem, because the minimized icon tells little about the program's state... so that with multiple Messenger windows, you never know which one you are going to get.

The best thing i have tried is standard taskbar + auto-hiding dock clone: the active tasks are well evident on the first, while i can always get frequent used things just popping up the dock.
Anyway i'm sure that something really better could be done...

My ideal dock would be: you have only the icons of you favorite programs on the bottom, like in Seven. The active ones are highlighted; when you move the mouse over an icon, it displaces the other icons to show the full name of the program, and becomes clickable.
Alternatively, when the program is active and has more than one task active, the icon shows their number on the angle: then when you are over it with the mouse, the other icons are displaced and it shows vertically a list of clickable boxes containing the names of the tasks.
In fact this is similar to the 7's taskbar, only with more text.
And, a little mouse-candy: you don't need to click an icon, you can simply tap the bottom of the screen under it. This way you don't need to stop & click.

[CABAListic]

For example, with exposè you can't know before where to click, and you have to recognize the window you want from its layout.

But this is only true if you have very few windows open - in which case I can probably see all of them, anyway, thanks to widescreen monitor and all that (this is then more a question of window management). As soon as I have more windows open, it is impossible for me to easily deduce which of the entries in the taskbar belongs to which. Even more so if I have opened several windows of the same program. In these cases, an exposé-like preview is much more helpful for quickly recognising the window I'm looking for. Virtual desktops would help here, because they spread the windows on several desktops, but alas, Windows still doesn't offer those.

[jacmoe]

The only thing which comes close to compiz-fusion on Linux (I love it! ) is Virtual Desktop Manager

Haven't tried it, though. Probably because I boot into Linux when I need a good WM.

[nikki]

The only thing which comes close to compiz-fusion on Linux (I love it! ) is Virtual Desktop Manager

Haven't tried it, though. Probably because I boot into Linux when I need a good WM.

Compiz is good if you want to show off Linux (well, Linux is more about the kernel, but still) to friends and all, but when it gets to really using the computer, I like it better without it.

I've recently begun to love dwm (no, not the Vista 'DWM', but 'dwm'). Its configured/extended by hacking the source and recompiling.

[jacmoe]

I use it all the time. Spin the cube with the mouse wheel, or flipping sides with the arrow-keys. Also, desktop-wall is awesome. Expo too.
I use it constantly.

[lonewolff]

It seems as though IE8 doesn't like the Ogre main homepage too much, unless you run it in compatability mode.

Damn Microsoft, trying to knock off Ogre so people will use DirectX 11.0

[KungFooMasta]

Interesting. 10-15 items is not that many, at times I have that many folders open at once. (meaning, this doesn't include the several instances of visual studio, browsers, outlook, messenger applications, etc. that are also open) I used to put my task bar on the right side, so that I could list a bunch of ungrouped items and still be able to read a decent amount of information. In recent times I'm finding that I fill up the taskbar to the point where grouping easily overpowers the ungrouping of items, in terms of organization and quick access. In personal use the grouping won't benefit me so much, but at work, it really saves me time.

[nikki]

I use it all the time. Spin the cube with the mouse wheel, or flipping sides with the arrow-keys. Also, desktop-wall is awesome. Expo too.
I use it constantly.

Oh. I don't use the mouse much nowadays.

I like eye-candy only in games.

[jacmoe]

I use it all the time. Spin the cube with the mouse wheel, or flipping sides with the arrow-keys. Also, desktop-wall is awesome. Expo too.
I use it constantly.

Oh. I don't use the mouse much nowadays.

I am talking about being productive. Compiz-Fusion really helps me to navigate my desktop environment. Eye-candy is a side-effect.

[nikki]

I use it all the time. Spin the cube with the mouse wheel, or flipping sides with the arrow-keys. Also, desktop-wall is awesome. Expo too.
I use it constantly.

Oh. I don't use the mouse much nowadays.

I am talking about being productive. Compiz-Fusion really helps me to navigate my desktop environment. Eye-candy is a side-effect.

Heh. You should try the tiling wms too. Like dwm, awesome, or xmonad. I'm using dwm right now. They're really good for productivity.

For example, instead of workspaces, dwm has 'tags'. You can toggle any tag on or off, or switch from one tag to the next. That way, you can have a few windows on tag, few more on another, and mix them, or choose one of each, assign more than one tag to one etc.

[Kojack]

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/246562/wind ... vours.html

There will be 6 versions of Windows 7 (yes, more of this crap like Vista):
- Starter (designed for netbooks, can only run 3 apps at once)
- Home Basic
- Home Premium
- Professional
- Enterprise
- Ultimate

[Klaim]

Here are some details too : http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2 ... itions.ars

So, it's more easy to choose witch version your need, but it's too much anyway :/

[lonewolff]

Where are the good old days of Home & Pro. Although, even that confused some people.

[betajaen]

Where are the good old days of Home & Pro. Although, even that confused some people.

I believe that's what their doing. Most of us will never see anything but Home Premium and Professional, the others are for business and "foreign" markets.

But I agree it should only be two types; Normal and Server, with 32-bit and 64-bit binaries on both discs.

[jacmoe]

I am totally underwhelmed by the whole thing..
I mean: just upgraded to Vista - what's the point?
Don't really want to pay that much for a new taskbar.

[_tommo_]

The point would be that it's much faster and better in everything, but besides that it looks like MS after the long pause with XP wants to update its system each 3 years, in order to gain flexibility... and also to get out of the Vista "flop".
Anyway given enough resources, Vista wasn't a bad OS for me, but they were forced to rush mainly by the bad image it had. So i think there's no point in change, if you don't need it. Just wait the first system format
So, IMHO makes sense... we only have to see if the prices will be "short" as the time of use

And why they can't just do 2 versions? In the DVD you have all the versions, you install all the features, they could give everything away for a fixed price, I don't think that this would damage profits... also because 90% of the profits come from OEMs, wich pay a fixed and lower price.