www.ditl.org

Tsukiyumi wrote:I'm of the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." school of thought.

I'm aware that that doesn't sell new OS..es to people, but I'm not a capitalist, and I don't care for the model.

It's not all fixing what ain't broke either to be fair. Many would accuse MS of doing that on the user interface front with 8 but there was lots of good that one change overshadowed. More beneficial technical advances will be in 9. Leaving aside the question of how enormous their profits are, the company needs to continue funding support for existing OSes (which they do longer than most software companies - up to 10 years with security updates). The way things always get shifted around in new versions of software is a nuisance though (that goes for Apple and Google and everyone else too)

As to the model, that won't be the same either, though it still will clearly focus on monetizing their software. More frequent, smaller updates to Windows (and IE and other software), with presumably smaller upgrade fees. Office 365 and OneDrive cloud subscriptions seem to be big in their plans.

There are leaked screenshots of a preliminary build sent to a Microsoft partner somewhere. This isn't what the final build will be since there are inevitably going to be some changes between now and then.

New hybrid start menu:


Notification center:


Apps running in desktop windows (here, PC settings app)


Virtual desktops:

I can deal with the apps screen in that setup. Not the way it does in 8 though.

Also I am not some bandwagon hater on Windows 8. Practically every computer I ever used with Windows 8 I had issues with it. I remember there was a week long period of me trying to figure out how to get the computer not to run the Google Chrome app instead of the regular version. Google Chrome app didn't work well with the setup for eBay needed for the family buisness.

Doesn't MS have issues on every new release?

Well, we were all misled. Nobody will care about Windows 9 since it does not exist.

However, Microsoft is reporting that Windows 10 is well on it's way, with a free to use preview of Windows 10 due out tomorrow. Windows 9 seems to have disappeared into the same void where all the doughnut holes are.

<shrug> Windows naming has never been consistent anyway.

With the release of Windows 10 Microsoft proves it can't count ?

Microsoft is justifying the name with the statement that they expect this to be the last "major" release of Windows (with future versions becoming more frequent but smaller and more incremental in nature). They also wanted to express the magnitude of the changes in this release (and perhaps distance it more from 8 though they won't say this). Evidently with all the "ones" already scattered in Microsoft's landscape (OneDrive cloud, OneNote program in the Office suite, XBox One) they considered Windows One but there already was a Windows 1.0 in 1985.



Though they showed off all the features which were already leaked (including Task View, which is the official name for the new virtual desktop system) the biggest new "feature" may be the integration of desktop windows with tablet and phone Windows and XBox OS. The current vision is more refined than that put forth with the release of 8: a shared Windows core with a UI tailored to each device class (as opposed to the more blunt approach of unifying the interface along with everything else). This will go further with "Continuum," an adaptive interface that automatically detects the characteristics of the device present and presents the optimal UI accordingly. In the example of some of the convertible laptops released with 8.x, when docked to the keyboard it will have a more standard desktop but when the screen is lifted away it will automatically switch to a more touch-friendly tablet mode. The last part of the puzzle is the Universal Windows app store which will debut with 10. Like the OS itself Universal apps are meant to share a common core but feature different UI for phone, tablet, and desktop (with Windows/the store automatically selecting which version to load on which device). This adaptive feature won't be present in the preview build (nor will Cortana or the newest upcoming update to Internet Explorer, which will feature a more Chrome-like layout with tabs on top and a broader extension framework like that introduced by Firefox)

The final release is expected "mid-2015" in the words of Windows development chief Terry Myserson. Official hardware requirements are unchanged from 8.0.

So I just installed the technical preview (in a vm of course).

At least the UI is nice, much nicer then windows 8.


However what's really disturbing is that apparently you HAVE to sign in to a Microsoft account!!!!


I am NOT happy about everything going cloud. ><


I suppose there might be local only accounts, I've only installed it once and just wanted to get it up and running so I didn't poke around much.



But still, I think this is the future, we're going to get preinstalled boxes with hardware ranges from web browsing only needs to gaming, and it will be essentially like your system was a dumb terminal.

I really, REALLY hope I'm wrong.

Isn't that essentially what Google Chrome Laptops are doing at the minute? Your machine just runs the web browser and everything runs off that?

Wouldn't work for me, but for people who can do everything they need to through Chrome there are advantages. The machines themselves tend to have better performance than budget laptops at the same price, due to the lower requirements of running Chrome. Not much chance of software problems either as essentially nothing is installed.

Windows 8 had the option of letting you log in with your Microsoft Account - don't remember if having one is an actual requirement of not. I just use a local account now.

LaughingCheese wrote:So I just installed the technical preview (in a vm of course).

At least the UI is nice, much nicer then windows 8.


However what's really disturbing is that apparently you HAVE to sign in to a Microsoft account!!!!


I am NOT happy about everything going cloud. ><


I suppose there might be local only accounts, I've only installed it once and just wanted to get it up and running so I didn't poke around much.



But still, I think this is the future, we're going to get preinstalled boxes with hardware ranges from web browsing only needs to gaming, and it will be essentially like your system was a dumb terminal.

I really, REALLY hope I'm wrong.

They've already stated that the final build will have local accounts, they just want to keep track of the beta/preview version usage.

The policy seems to be the same as with 8.1 here. I'm running the preview on both my systems and the option for a local account is there. In 8.1 it's a bit hidden but a few clicks and you can get to it (but it will come up automatically when Windows doesn't detect any networks during setup, either because it didn't pick up the driver during installation, the wired isn't plugged in or the user skipped the step of setting up their wireless network). When setting up the preview on my desktop I did notice that it offered a local account before it had the chance to initialize the network connection. I did go back and put in my existing Microsoft account though, since I use OneDrive and Microsoft mail.

There's another theory as to why Microsoft skipped 9, not from within Microsoft but from programmers who write programs for Windows. Even though the code base has changed dramatically (particularly since the original DOS legacy has been abandoned), the name Windows has been around for quite a while, encompassing "Windows 95" and "Windows 98." Thus version checking (particularly with some older programs which may not be updated, or which many users won't bother to) would get messy since many already include checks against "Windows 9x." This may be a way for Microsoft to neatly avoid breaking things, and a name which can also tie into marketing.

kostmayer wrote:Isn't that essentially what Google Chrome Laptops are doing at the minute? Your machine just runs the web browser and everything runs off that?

Essentially yes but, so what? Doesn't apply to me since I don't use Chrome.

IanKennedy wrote: They've already stated that the final build will have local accounts, they just want to keep track of the beta/preview version usage.

Oh great, so just like Planetary Annihilation, great.


This IS the future tho isn't it?

Just the fact that you CAN sign in and have your settings and photos saved to the cloud disturbs me.

If its through an app that you download and install like Dropbox then fine, but having this built into the OS is just the first step on a slippery slope.

SkyNet here we come.

LaughingCheese wrote:
If its through an app that you download and install like Dropbox then fine, but having this built into the OS is just the first step on a slippery slope.

How is an app any better than simply having it built in?