The window manager now draws using DX - great! Mission Accomplished. However now that you have unlimited abilities why not use them? While Avalon seems to have solved the 2D graphics issues as per development and desiagn, many 3D usage questions are largely
Flipping windows and glass like transparency are yesterday's news. Vista would appear to have the engine of a Ferrari and the body of a Toyota Camry.
And what's the deal with lack of skinning? Ok so grandma won't want skins, so why deny the ability to everyone? Even with skinning ability built in, is it built in in such a way that grandma is forced to use it? The uniformity of windows IS NOT THE SELLING
POINT. I must have watched 10 videos today and ironically the thing most developers got most excited about was the revamping of the bundled games. Why is the creativity of Microsoft employees so stifled that they only feel comfrotable experimenting with the
"unimportant" areas of Windows? Are people going to switch to OS X in droves because the Windows UI is "too 3D", that somehow there are too many skinable options and that they would therfore feel a need to use OS X to get a sense of conformity in their work?
What kind of BS arguments are these?
How ironic-when Kam is asked for something to show off about the new window manager, he has almost nothing to talk about and then says "This is super secret PDC bits- I'll show you THE NEW SOLITARE?" Hello? Solitare? That's the best the Windows Team can
do? Oh and Minesweeper. Yeah that's some 21st century lipstick for the 1990's pig, alright. When I tune into the NBA Championships I want to see Micheal Jordon play. What group of people at Microsoft hires 500+ Micheal Jordon's and then tells them they can't
dunk and dribble, all they can do is pass and shoot from the outside because 400 million people in the audience might get too excited? Common people this is making me sad.
It was nice to see how the shell supported the dynamic display and creation of metadata ot files. This was long overdue, must of us expected this to ship with XP.
1. Isn't OLE DB about a ten year old idea at this point? Not that it wasn't great but isn't there an all managed technique for doing these days?
2. If all the shell people do is write new COM interfaces why wait for an entire OS rev to ship updates, couldn't these revs come on a more regular basis without the underlying OS dependencies? Wouldn't that be a lot less of a headache for all concerned. Politics
aside couldn't the shell just be considered another application distinct from the underlying OS services that run in kernal mode? Especially since the Windows OS must ultimately target nonPC platforms to grow, doesn't it make sense to decouple formally in
3. Isn't it about time Windows kicked the whole registering stuff habit? Maybe the new dumping ground for file registration is a local copy of active directory, rather than the win32 registry, but this is not clear from the video.
4. Do file extensions even make sense in a world of metadata, when the associations of a file can have much richer descriptions? Why in the world is Microsoft still dealing with file extensions 20 years after DOS?
4.Isn't it about time that the Windows Shell kicked the COM habit now that its 2005? Shouldn't the shell really be entirely written in Avalon/.NET, given that Avalon/.Net will ship Nov. 7 of this year and Vista is not shipping till next year? If Sparkle can
work why not the shell, which seems to do much less visually. Okay you have some cool algorithms working with the file system kernal under the covers- great, but isn't the real test of the next gen development platform making the kernal play nicely in the
5. Are you guys really eating your own dog food, or is it that things like office and the shell are too important to risk implementing with the technology you're forcing onto the developer community?