Leaked screenshots suggest Windows 7 looks like Vista

Microsoft have often used the UI of previous versions of Windows while working on their newest projects. Having said that, considering one of the biggest changes in Vista WAS the UI, they may have drifted from that habit. Will this be NT6.x or NT7 I wonder? Oh, and i'm glad the calculator is improved; that was the only thing stopping me from upgrading >_>. Why use my more functional pocket calculator that runs on three-thousandths of a watt when I can use a gorgeous glossy Vista-themed calculator?

...ribbon interface infection spreading all over Windows now. That ridiculous user disablement feature is what drove me away from Office 2007, after I gave it a year to get used to it. Utterly unusable. So I guess it's XP until maybe 2015 then...

no, it's not perfect (no such thing as a perfect os), but it pretty nifty, i think. if microsoft focused on slimming it down and trimming off the rough bits like apple is doing with snow leopard (instead of adding feature after feature), they might come out with a decent system.

I don't need Vista, let alone its replacement. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Why the need to rush out new versions, we've only just got used to XP, then someone in IT decided Vista would be a good ides, then some bright spark came up with jumbling up all the toolbars in Office while adding no new features, back round we go again with another Windows.

Just leave the darn thing alone will you!

it's only milestone 3. I wouldn't expect anything spectacular.

No way, it looks like Vista? You mean just like every Alpha looks like the preceding version of Windows?

Remember Longhorn in its early stages? Looked just like XP with that nice Plex theme. Remember Whistler? It looked like Windows 2000. Because essentially, it was. They both eventually changed to their own unique UI before release - the milestone builds are concerned with more fundamental changes, not something as trivial as a UI update.

Idiot.

Not that it's going to matter in functionality or reason... It's all based off of Vista and the GUI is tuned last. 

Again, it's polishing a turd.

It's still a bit early to KNOW what Windows 7 looks like but still....

What the h3ll did you expect??? This is Microsoft don'tchaknow.

As long as it doesn't *behave* like Vista. Improve performance, reduce annoyances (e.g., put a Vista skin on an XP OS), and maybe MS would have something usable again, and I can finally replace my laptop.

"Stupid article
No way, it looks like Vista? You mean just like every Alpha looks like the preceding version of Windows?

Remember Longhorn in its early stages? Looked just like XP with that nice Plex theme. Remember Whistler? It looked like Windows 2000. Because essentially, it was. They both eventually changed to their own unique UI before release - the milestone builds are concerned with more fundamental changes, not something as trivial as a UI update.

Idiot. (posted by: Max)"

I personally cannot stand the continual dumbing down of Windows. Huge fonts, enormous window chrome, wizards filling half the display area, giant buttons on the UI where four would have fit previously, "designed for toddlers" applications.

Fair enough, an OS should not necessarily be hard to use, but when it's designed for your three year old and your grandma is it really the best choice for you?

Speaking as a customer since the days of Dos 5.0, Microsoft does not understand what I want from them, at all.

Microsoft is just "Putting up Walls" when it comes to the UI, just look at IE 8 same UI. One of the biggest complaints about IE 7 was the forced UI changes. Microsoft knows it they just refuse to acknowledged it. Why use the Ribbon, because it different and it not eating crow. Why admit you were wrong when you can just go on changing things til you customers give up. That would be a good name for Windows 7, Windows for Walls.... The different versions could be, "with frosted glass, with black glass, with opaque glass wow the list could go on and on.

Come on Microsoft dump these crazy ideas, Vista is dead, W7 is going the same way. What we all want is a better XP.

MS already has a great new OS. Server 2008. It's everything Vista should have been: fast, modular, reliable, and without all the useless fluff.

seriously.... who cares what it looks like... vista's looks weren't what made it bad. i actually liked the looks a lot. if it looks exactly like vista, but performs well, then it is a winner in my book. even though it's vole, i still hate it when people bash things based purely on irrelevant facts.

Its a given that Microsoft will use the same or at least a deritive of the Vista UI, after all they spent sqillions of dollars developing it and the technology in Vista for them to take a BIG step back and go for something resembling a practically end-of-line product like Windows XP.
If you are having trouble getting used to the idiosycracies of Vista, I would suggest that you get request an Ubuntu CD and use that. I did that and it made the transition to Vista, that much less painful. The main part that I got used to was being an enviroment were my login was not administrator level and that I had to enter a password so that a program or installer could run.

All you people that live in the delusional "XP is king" world are retarded, end of story, XP is old and tired and its so riddled with security holes its scarey...

Seven is NT6 & Less than Ultimate. Longhorn was server 2008 in Beta, so Don't take much as Holy Grail at this time. --__---- -___- 

Remember, Ultimate was written for Single Core Enviorment, 7 is supposed to first step into multi core. I'd Say Dual Core Duel has gotten into word True Multicore by Now.

Lucky 7 has Reputation to Create & it should be good for Consumer Desktop.Read that First Beta is Dec 2009. So Probably near 2011 Retail, yet it could be quicker, as its half step down.
STeWie Drashek


and he just laughed and laughed and laughed.

I read all the INQ articles crucifying Vista early on. Believing the rhetoric, I had no intention of ever buying it. 

Then out of necessity I reluctantly purchased a Vista64 system with 6 GB. With SP1 Vista64 has been a better performer than I could ever get out of XP Pro system. 

INQ needs to inject some journalistic objectivity outside of the incessant Vista bash for the sake of bash commentary, 

Every system I build from here on out will be Vista64 - no reservations - whatsoever. 

What do you want for the next Windows? What do you like and dislike? Try not to argue yourself, join the beta and tell it to the Windows maker.

i came across this torrent link but vista is being pooed on by everybody, i don't even want it for free. And on top of that, i'm not in the mood to upgrade my good old P3 1ghz.

Come on, we are in the transitional period with all the new stuff to look forward to in the new year.

When intel release the Nehalem and Larrabee it'll put the tech. world on fire and really get them to pull their thumbs from where ever and do something.

Hopefully we'll see something from, my previous fav. company, nvidia. I think right now ati with the cash from amd are kicking nvidia in the balls... so much so, they are having trouble standing still which is why they are releasing rubbish chips and now chipsets... how the mighty have fallen!

All the big talk, just hot air from both ends. If only they could back it up...

This could easily come to intel if they are not careful... AMD just need some more oil money and they'll kill the competition, oh, and the case against intel to prove true. Intel already got busted in japan and europe as far as i remember.

And the next version of Ubuntu will look largely like this one.

unfortunately, they will continue with the xp themed (home, pro, corp) versioning. It looks like in the control panel screens there is a place for 3 different versions, home, pro, premium maybe. I would be more interested in seeing versions that make sence like a server, home, and media version.

First it was windows 3.1, then windows 95, then windows 98, then windows 2000... get the trend here? Then windows XP which is roman numerals for 200P. Then, it was windows 2003 and now it is windows Vista which is roman numerals for 200V.

So now you tell me its Windows 7?
That was like, so long ago like between 3.1 and 95 there, guy!
It's like, "sheesh" whaddya think yer talkin aboot!

The 'ix' operating systems change versions from time to time but you don't get all this fussing, even when the change is a pretty significant. I think we're cutting Microsoft too much slack here, there's just too much room for them to pull the wool over our collective eyes. A UI isn't an operating system, its just an interface. There should be an expectation of backwards compatibility - things shouldn't have to be rewritten just because of a minor OS tweak. By perpetuating this kind of myth -- "Its changed so everything else has to" -- we lower our own expectations so when we get fed a porky, overpriced piece of software that doesn't work right we are tempted to just eat it and love the taste. We can do better.

..MS are going the way of all empires - if they had only looked after their core, built excellent OSes, instead of broken 'Jack-of-all-trades', they would both earn money and loyalty. XP currently is the only alternative for most, linux can be like seeing a bad shrink and isn't as supported as it should be.
IMHO, MS need W7 to be lean and mean - GL with that...

Has anyone tried out tinyvista??
a stripped vista version that fit in a single cd instalation.

i've tried it out, and find it very unique. the memory footprint on os alone is also much lower than standar vista (Ultimate). result in much improved experience.

on the downside, it used a cracked activation scheme. 

try to google it

To put a slight twist on your kind words :
"All you people that live in the delusional "Vista is king" world are retarded, end of story, Vista is DRMed to death and bloated like there's no tomorrow and its so riddled with security holes its scarey..."

Now put your head back in the sand and keep that bum up high where Uncle Steve can have a good go.

Some people don't like change, the saying 'If it aint broke, don't fix it' is probably one of the worst sayings ever! There is such a thing as preventative maintenance which is a far more important thing. If the car aint broke, you still get it serviced! If a plane aint broke (leads to a nasty crash) parts are still replaced even though they still work fine. XP was far from perfect, it was patched, fixed, and extended significantly over the years to support new hardware and to improve it. Its actually an old worn OS and it shows now on the latest (I re-iterate latest) computers. If you're foolish enough to try to run it on an older or lower end computer then you deserve to be burned by its performance. If you do things realistically, have it fully updated, and run it with 4gb of ram etc Vista is far superior, only in 64 bit though! Certain features turned off make an improvement, one of the best ones which is most often told incorrectly is disabling application superfetch. Can only be done through the registry by setting superfetch to '2', the service must remain running. Thats just one example. In terms of streamlined vista, don't use cracked software, streamline it yourself. This can be done with vlite, which is free, legal, and easy to use.

Windows 7 is not actually Windows 7, its Windows 6.1. Win 6.1 is to 6 and XP 5.1 is to Windows 2000 5.0. It will be significantly improved upon from its current state, but in an effect its really just a very heavily updated Vista. Vista is not that bad, its almost impossible to crash and is significantly more reliablle than XP. If you have a good enough computer and some CORRECT computer knowledge it is fast, reliable, and stable. The only downside with Vista is slightly slower USB and file copy speed which apparently is being rectified.

Why the h3ll do you guys always say 'I want a better version of XP' or like Linux, we already have that, 'Vista', Vista is XP, with a better User Interface and Power Management, its still Windows!
And why do people like Linux, the UI is ugly, its just as fast as Windows, the reason why Linux is faster, is because its smaller, and a bunch of college students who think they know it all but don't and older retards couldn't be bothered to write full-functional code. Thus, Linux looks bad, and doesn't do f'all.
Vista looks good, works good, and runs games like the XBox 360.
You see, Linux copied XP's desktop, very unsuccessfully, and people that hated XP and couldn't wait for / afford Windows Vista, they decided to get Linux. Linux has far too much command-line-based integrity, and is masked with an image, like KDE or GNOME that probably could run on less powerful kernel.
Linux is broken into parts, XP isn't, and neither is Vista.
XP is Vista, with a better UI, get used to it.
Try making your own OS like Windows, you don't know how hard it is.
Microsoft owns Windows, they have the right do change their own property. It's not like XP is unsupported, you can use XP if you wish, just because your old crappy PCs can't run a powerful OS, doesn't mean Vista is any more buggy than XP, in fact it is less. XP is full of security loop-holes because hackers are getting used to it as it gets older.
Vista is much more securer than Linux and XP, in fact Mac OS X is more secure because its more isolated and less supported to Win32 and Makefile-ELF based binaries.
XP is 6/10 now.
Vista is 8/10 now.
Linux is 5/10 now.
Mac OS X is 7/10 now.
Windows 7 is impossible to rate because I haven't used it.

Oh yeah, to the guys that wrote this article, ThinkNext.net is made by the same guys that release the Longhorn screenshots, when Longhorn was a lot like XP's theme, etc, they couldn't find any ideas, but they discovered transparency in a later Beta, all OSs look a lot like their predecessor at MileStones age. Windows 7 is still missing a lot of things from the feature list, only about 50 programs have changed, and that's only technology upgrades, like .NET, ASP.NET, Tasks, and their UIs.
I heard there's a new Windows Form to be added to Windows Forms of .NET, which is very similiar to MileStone 3 of Windows 7's Paint, where there's a line after the icon and a Quick Access area next to it. I have not heard of the Office Button and a Quick Access area next it yet, but this is something that requires application level programming.
Janus Windows UIs is a good, low cost solution for the Ribbon Tab Strip for .NET Windows Forms, and it comes with non-Aero Office 2007, etc themes for Linux, Mac OS X and XP Windows emulation/compatibility.

I want to see ribbons in Windows 7 for multi-task-orientated applications ONLY.

I want to see Outlook Office Style tool bars in Windows 7 for Office-based task-orientated applications ONLY.

I want to see DWM styles in Windows 7 for non-Office-based applications ONLY, like Control Panel, Games, Internet Explorer, and Windows Live, I like the cooler styles as they bring a fresh, futuristic view to the situation.

I wouldn't mind a glass-styled Ribbon UI theme, that makes Vista look like Vista, this was missed out in Microsoft Office, because Microsoft Office 2007 is based on Outlook and earlier versions of Microsoft Office.

I wouldn't mind multi-DWM areas either, then DWM could be drawn within the Window, anywhere and not just at the borders, this would enable glass in the Ribbon UI as well.

I wouldn't mind DWM areas to be coloured seperately rather than just under the default/system-set colours, and images should be drawn with transparency on glass, this could be done using Z-Index anti-aliasing and opacity drawing.

Thanks for reading my comment.
Appreciate my concerns, please.
Accept my opinion, please.
Thank you.
Please join my friend's Windows 7 web site:
http://www.windowseven.co.nr/