Longhorn 3D GUI Engine Quicktime movies.

longhorn2004longhorn2004
Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Still alpha builds, this is not how longhorn will look. Just like whistler looked before Luna designe.



These movies simply show the raw power of the new engine.



http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2003/0509/k1_4.htm



http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2003/0509/k1_5.htm



http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2003/0509/k1_6.htm



http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2003/0509/k1_7.htm



http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...eview_2003.asp Info about the engine...



Longhorn will have 2 tier Guis.



Tier 1 is for low level computers, that runs a classic type of engine, like win2k, DX7 engine.



Tier 2 will be something like or more impressive than OSX and of course faster.



Here are the requirements for Tier 2:



The Minimum Requirements

- Stable Longhorn Graphics Driver

- GPU Scheduling (multiple clients are guaranteed)

- GPU Memory Management (video memory always available)

- Hardware V-Sync Interrupt

- Pixel Shader 2.0 (DX9-class GPU)

- 4x FSAA

- Bump & Environment Mapping with Luminance

- Hardware Transformation & Lighting

- 1024x768 with 32-bit color

- 64MB Video Memory (128MB recommended)

- AGP 8x or PCI Express



As we can see in the movies, the new GUI is really impressive... No slow downs, no cpu process, multi-tasking is a breeze.



http://www.winsupersite.com/images/s..._winhec_12.png



Probably after longhorn get's released, OS X will shrivel up and die.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 5
    709709 Posts: 2,016member
  • Reply 2 of 5
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.



    In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.



    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 300 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.



    Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.
  • Reply 3 of 5
    709709 Posts: 2,016member
    You're flirting.
  • Reply 4 of 5
    longhorn2004longhorn2004 Posts: 3member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by 709

    You're flirting.



    It's not our fault after several updates, OSX still lags when you expand, scroll, or maximize windows.



    Not only that, it's quite unresponsive when there is a few windows open.



    If you watching a movie or listening to music, there is no chance you can browse the web. This suppose to be a multi-tasking OS?



    My God, save their souls!
  • Reply 5 of 5
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,262member
Sign In or Register to comment.