Apolyton Archive | Preserved copy of the Apolyton Civilization Site and its forums as they stood in September 2005. Read-only; nothing here can be posted to or replied to. | Forum index | About this archive | The 1998–2001 UBB forums
Nostromo, interesting piece. I wonder though, if that figure on 2 billion in online sales of PC games, subscriptions, etc is really from MS. Its the first real quantification of that piece of the market Ive seen.
Virtual Folders are useful! I am already using some sort of this in XP where I dump all the data (e.g. research papers) in a certain place and then create folders to seperate them based on their content and place a link of the paper in the folder. I might have the same paper referenced in several folders because it may fit more topics.
I had hoped something like this would be part of the next Windows.
Timexwatch
King
Columbia Heights, Washington D.C.
Jul 1999 time: 00:37
quote: Originally posted by Timexwatch
I'm a bit dense, but are virtual folders like the Gmail's "label" system?
quote: As with XP, all of these folders are "real" folders. That is, they exist at a discrete place in the shell hierarchy and can contain real files and folders. They are literally identical to folders in XP. However, Windows Vista, as you may know, also introduces the concept of Virtual Folders. These are not "real" folders but are instead XML-based containers for links to other files and folders. Virtual Folders do not "contain" anything. Instead, Virtual Folders point to lists of other files and aggregate data in meaningful ways.
Think back to when Windows 95 first shipped. Windows 95 let you create shortcuts to documents and folders in more easily accessible places (typically the desktop). In the same vein, Virtual Folders let you round up related files and folders in more easily accessible places as well. But Virtual Folders are far more powerful than simple shortcuts. That's because Virtual Folders are smart--that is, they update dynamically--and because they make it easier for you to organize your data in ways that make sense to you.
Windows Vista Beta 1 ships with a number of canned Virtual Folders that address obvious needs, and some of them are available right from the Start Menu. Stupidly, some of them are named the same as "real" folders, which is where some of the confusion sets in. So when you click on the Documents link in the Start menu, for example, that opens C:\Users\Paul\Virtual Folders\All Documents and not C:\Users\Paul\Documents as you might expect (Figure). The former (All Documents) is a Virtual Folder that automatically aggregates all of the documents on your hard drive, regardless of their location, while the latter (Documents) is the modern day equivalent of My Documents: It's just a regular folder, and when you save document files from an application like Microsoft Word, that's where they'll go by default.
quote: Originally posted by Timexwatch
I'm a bit dense, but are virtual folders like the Gmail's "label" system?
No, not really. But sorta.
Think of them like virtual folders in Outlook 2003, or "Saved Searches" in Mozilla Thunderbird...but systemwide.
You enter in query information -- like all files containing references to "mastercard" or "visa" and dated within the past month, and that folder will contain all documents that match that query.
Another example is you can have it show only Word Documents that are authored by you.
Pretty powerful.
Timexwatch
King
Columbia Heights, Washington D.C.
Jul 1999 time: 00:37
But the important question about this new Windows is have they finally gotten rid of Windows Messenger?
I'm soo tired of each time I start Windows MSN Messenger says I have been logged in on another computer, but I've been logged into Windows Messenger instead
I have tried 100+ times to uncheck it's startup in msconfig, but it doesn't make any difference
Er, I already have 'Virtual Folders' on OS X... they're saved Spotlight searches, and they work exactly in the same way as Vista ones do, as described above.
quote: Originally posted by Adrian Hon
Er, I already have 'Virtual Folders' on OS X... they're saved Spotlight searches, and they work exactly in the same way as Vista ones do, as described above.
You obviously didn't read Paul Thurrott's tech showcase:
quote: Before we get started, I should mention that Apple's latest operating system, Mac OS X 10.4 ("Tiger," see my review) offers very similar functionality. However, Microsoft announced and demonstration Windows Vista's virtual folders functionality a year before Apple revealed that it was working on that feature, so let's not making any copying accusations just yet. Suffice to say that this kind of functionality is incredibly useful for real people, and thus is an obvious candidate for inclusion in any modern operating system. That Apple arrived at a set of functionality that closely mimics what Microsoft had previously demonstrated is not surprising or outrageous.
Did I say I thought that Microsoft was copying Spotlight searches in Vista? No. Like he says, it's a useful and obvious thing to have in an OS. I simply thought it was worth pointing out that that feature, which people here seem to like the sound of, currently exists in OS X.
quote: By the time this hunk of crap comes out, Apple will be leaps and bounds ahead again with its next operating system.
Leaps and bounds over Win3.1? Probably. Over XP? Naw, they don't even match it yet. Vista? Gotta be dreaming.
Gotta love how you have to pay $100+ for less of an upgrade than the free SP2 for XP.
Unfortunetly for Mac fanboys, Macs suck. That's why they have trouble even getting to 5% marketshare.
Nice try, but you don't know what you're talking about. From what has been announced, Vista will probably add features that OS X already has, some of them going back for years (like a decent graphics system). What happened to all the other stuff "Longhorn" was supposed to have? Ditched, because they couldn't make it work, and because they spent so much time trying to secure the swiss cheese XP, which is a lost cause if ever there was one.
Apple has a small marketshare because it doesn't compete in all sections of the computer market and because of the Microsoft virtual monopoly. Plus, it's mainly a north american thing. It's rather an old fashioned company, from the days when computer makers made the whole widget. It's about the only one of those companies that has survived, which is a testament to the quality of its products.
From recent events it looks as if Microsoft are in trouble. From Apple? No, except in digital media, especially music. From Google? Most certainly.
And who the hell decided to call it "Vista"? How uncool....
quote: Originally posted by Adrian Hon
Did I say I thought that Microsoft was copying Spotlight searches in Vista? No. Like he says, it's a useful and obvious thing to have in an OS. I simply thought it was worth pointing out that that feature, which people here seem to like the sound of, currently exists in OS X.
Ah.. leave them alone.
I've noticed that the Wintrolls are more shrill in recent weeks. That tells you all you need to know about Vista.
quote: Originally posted by Adrian Hon
Did I say I thought that Microsoft was copying Spotlight searches in Vista? No. Like he says, it's a useful and obvious thing to have in an OS. I simply thought it was worth pointing out that that feature, which people here seem to like the sound of, currently exists in OS X.
That's interesting Aggie, because I've noticed a lot of Apple fanboys raiding Windows Vista threads with rampant damage control.
That tells me all I need to know about Vista.
In the meantime, you can continue fantasizing about the upcoming 200 new features in Domestic Housecat, including variable color schemes (50 new features by itself) and other necessities like random desktop wallpaper.
quote: Originally posted by Asher
That's interesting Aggie, because I've noticed a lot of Apple fanboys raiding Windows Vista threads with rampant damage control.
Indeed. It seems like Apple fanboys get all bent out of shape when someone criticizes Macs on one of their threads but when ever there is a random discuss Windows thread, the Mac fanboys come out and say "that sucks, it's copied" or whatnot. Practice what you preach, eh?
And I love how Aggie blames the lack of marketshare on they don't compete in the same places (you mean like the other 95% of the personal OS market ) and they are 'old school' in that they make everything themselves (which, of course, makes it far less useful than Windows which can run on the CPUs of many different manufacturers). And even with all that, Windows beats down whatever OS's Apple puts out there. The marketshare speaks for itself. If OSX were that much more advanced, where is the marketshare number to reflect that?
Something about IE 7's support for standards and CSS. I figured this could interest some of the web developers here. Can't say I understand what he's talking about
quote: I've got to admit: Microsoft initiating blogs for their employees and development teams was probably the single best thing they've ever done. Case in point:
I read on the IE development blog about the standards and CSS improvements that have already been made in IE7 and what's planned for its future. Microsoft, the megacompany, likes to have a public focus on improving "stability and security" in their products and it's obvious that it's the official line they're towing on IE7. I was delighted to read this post because in webdev circles, the biggest hassle with IE is it's CSS idiosyncrasies that mean wasted hours writing workarounds. Enough of my blabbering, here's a detailed list of the problems already fixed in IE7 beta 2:
Peekaboo bug, Guillotine bug, Duplicate Character bug, Border Chaos, No Scroll bug, 3 Pixel Text Jog, Magic Creeping Text bug, Bottom Margin bug on Hover, Losing the ability to highlight text under the top border, IE/Win Line-height bug, Double Float Margin Bug, Quirky Percentages in IE, Duplicate indent, Moving viewport scrollbar outside HTML borders, 1 px border style,Disappearing List-background, Fix width:auto.
They've also added support for:
HTML 4.01 ABBR tag, Improved (though not yet perfect)
30-07-2005 00:30
) and they are 'old school' in that they make everything themselves (which, of course, makes it far less useful than Windows which can run on the CPUs of many different manufacturers). And even with all that, Windows beats down whatever OS's Apple puts out there. The marketshare speaks for itself. If OSX were that much more advanced, where is the marketshare number to reflect that?
|