Icon resizing in Windows? HAHA
I was looking through Paul Thurrotts Windows Supersite, and came along the new version of Windows that Micro$oft is making. Take a look at the picture, their trying to implement Icon resizing!!! HA! This made me laugh!! Thats nowhere NEAR the quality of OS X! hahaha...
check out the link for the picture:
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/4015_068.png
Microsoft also has this comment: "3D Graphics Enhancements in Windows Longhorn Windows Longhorn will foster a major step forward in terms of how graphics hardware is used by mainstream Windows-based applications, from the Windows desktop to consumer and line-of-business applications." ...Microsoft thinks this is 3D?..
check out the link for the picture:
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/4015_068.png
Microsoft also has this comment: "3D Graphics Enhancements in Windows Longhorn Windows Longhorn will foster a major step forward in terms of how graphics hardware is used by mainstream Windows-based applications, from the Windows desktop to consumer and line-of-business applications." ...Microsoft thinks this is 3D?..
Comments
might as well be using Windows 3.1
The reason it looks like crap is because Microsoft hasn't 'vectorized' the interface yet; we're still stuck with Slate. We should start to see how Aero looks and works by early 2005. Of course, by then, I'm hoping Apple would have already laid the ground work for 10.4, with their own QE-enhanced vector-based UI.
As it stands, OS X has the advantage because our icons are 128x128 by design. The review looks like it blew up the icon by about 300-400% and even an OS X icon at 400% would be pixelicious.
Nothing to see here... just some Windows-bashing... move along...
Do you think they could use any more blue? Jeesh, what is there obsession with gradients of blue!
Originally posted by Scott
Apple's not using vector icons as far as I know.
No they aren't, YET. However, because OS X comes with 128x128 pixel icons, the OS only needs to scale DOWN the icons. Because Windows only has 48x48 icons ATM, it is forced to scale them UP. This causes nasty pixelation. I assume that Longhorn will eventually either have 128x128 icons, or vector icons.
Originally posted by Scott
Yea yea I know. There's nothing stopping this windows update from doing the same thing.
Exactly. Hopefully, they will, because I am sick of going fixing a PC (semi-job) and seeing graphics that do not seem to have any rhyme or reason to them. Microsoft has a great chance to turn things around, and I hope they take advantage of it.
Even bringing Windows up to Jaguar-level would be great. The PC world deserves a decent OS, not just stability-wise (XP did help with that, but its still not great), but graphically. For god sakes, would someone please take away the gradient tool from the MS Graphic Design Team? :P
Originally posted by Phroggy
All the review says is that Longhorn will use a vector-based UI. This is a good thing.
A good thing for Windows?
Seriously though, what advantage is there in using a vector-based UI over what we have now, (Quartz and Quartz Extreme), or is it already vector-based. Would it be much faster, or what? m.
Originally posted by Merovingian
A good thing for Windows?
Seriously though, what advantage is there in using a vector-based UI over what we have now, (Quartz and Quartz Extreme), or is it already vector-based. Would it be much faster, or what? m.
A vector-based UI would allow widgets, etc, to appear the same size on various sized screens, but with better quality. This opens the door for extremely high-dpi displays. Not a big deal for Joe Shmoe, but for people who care about their computing experience, it will make a big difference. Although unless you have a really high-dpi screen, you wont notice it
Originally posted by foad
Isn't a vector based UI less computationally intense?
No. The opposite, actually. The OS is going to need to draw all the widgets on screen, rather than simply blitting pixels. To get the same Aqua interface that we now see, I doubt all that drawing could be handed over to the GPU either.
However, it would be significantly less bandwidth intense. That's better for remote displays.
Apple is in on the right track. I am doubtful MS has anything significant that Apple hasn't already done or thought of (and possibly rejected). Every time I (momentarily) get concerned that MS "has something" on Apple, I find myself to have been wrong.
Apple is fine here.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Quartz is vector-based. However that doesn't mean that it doesn't use some raster-based approaches as well. The "right" answer (as usual) is probably in the middle (where Apple is right now). The "purest" solution (all vector-based) is likely impractical, where the "fastest" solution (all raster-based) is ugly and inflexible.
Apple is in on the right track. I am doubtful MS has anything significant that Apple hasn't already done or thought of (and possibly rejected). Every time I (momentarily) get concerned that MS "has something" on Apple, I find myself to have been wrong.
Apple is fine here.
I agree that we probably have nothing to fear from Longhorn, but you never know.
An all vector-based OS may be impractical now, but look to the future. In say 5 years, I can see incredibly high-dpi displays. Couple that with a vector-based UI, and you've got a VERY nice lookin' OS. Atm, it's impractical because of CPU, but mostly GPU constraints. But the next generation of GPUs could make it possible without slowing things down a lot..
As Jobs said, with OSX, they can spend 90% of their development effort on NEW features - they can do anything they want, expecially with all the time Microsoft has given them with such a late release schedule for Longhorn.
Originally posted by MajorMatt
That Paul Thurrot is the biggest windows zealot Iv ever seen....I laugh when PC peeps use his site to prove something.
Do you think they could use any more blue? Jeesh, what is there obsession with gradients of blue!
I was talking to a buddy of mine, born and raised PC user, forced to get a Tibook for Berklee, now he only uses his tiBook and really likes it.
but I was talking to him about UI and stuff, and he said "yeah, the only thing mac needs is a better interface I think, when I see windows xp and all that blue it's like 'aaah that's right'"
I was sitting there quietly thinking "WTF?!?" and proceeded to casually mention how the original OS X was all aqua like, with lots of blue and clear, and that panther is making everything brushed metal. Then he said "mac really needs to include customization"
I said, yeah, there is shapeshifter, but it's $20
"mac needs to make that shit free"
it's funny, you can always tell you're talking to a hardcore PC user when they refer to apple as "mac"
Originally posted by Wrong Robot
I was sitting there quietly thinking "WTF?!?" and proceeded to casually mention how the original OS X was all aqua like, with lots of blue and clear, and that panther is making everything brushed metal. Then he said "mac really needs to include customization"
I said, yeah, there is shapeshifter, but it's $20
"mac needs to make that shit free"
Ummm...is that guy for real? Theming on a PC isn't free unless you do a DLL hack which is a shady deal and a involved process to a degree. If you want to programs, then you can either use StyleXP or WindowsBlinds, both of which aren't free.
Originally posted by the cool gut
Regardless, it shows you how far behind both XP and Longhorn are currently BEHIND osX.
As Jobs said, with OSX, they can spend 90% of their development effort on NEW features - they can do anything they want, expecially with all the time Microsoft has given them with such a late release schedule for Longhorn.
Yeah, but even if Longhorn isn't going to be out for awhile, that doesn't mean Apple should slow down on supercharging Mac OS X as much as possible.
In my opinion, this is a very crucial time for Apple with their Mac OS X. They have a very good edge over the current version of Windows. But Microsoft is coming out with an OS that is similar to how Mac OS X works. While of course it may not be as wonderful as Mac OS X is, many people won't care because they are used to Windows.
But Apple needs to keep improving Mac OS X and adding more features so that when Longhorn does arrive on the scene, it is nowhere near as powerful as Mac OS X is. This is Apple's time to get as far ahead as possible and then stay ahead.
Just my two cents worth.
Mike