Windows 7 demo at D6: Really? That's it?
During the joint Gates/Ballmer opening interview at the D6 conference on Tuesday (all stories), the audience was treated to an early look at Windows 7, which, according to Ballmer, will ship to customers in late 2009. The demo showed a full-screen multitouch interface embedded in the operating system. We saw a demo of a Surface-like app for organizing photos, and what appeared to be the Windows 1.0 Paint app, except that you can now draw with all your fingers at once. Also, a digital globe app, where the two-handed interface makes good sense. And a piano app, on which, thanks to multitouch, you can now play chords.
Aside from a glimpse at a touch-enabled Windows task bar, that was it. The interface. The coat of paint on top of the multitasking engine, the file system, the security, the device drivers...the foundation that the UI is built on top of.
After the demo, I ran in to Bill Gates and asked him why he showed just the UI and didn't discuss the underpinnings. His explanation: "It's hard to show more in only five minutes...the security, the speed..." Then he took his plate of shrimp and left. And Ballmer had said, earlier in the evening, that the biggest pushback Microsoft got on Vista from customers was not around its security systems or its drivers, but rather on its interface.
But I really want to believe that customers--or failing that, at least the techie D6 audience--is able to see beyond the surface. There are so many more important things to worry about, both for users and for Microsoft. Cloud computing is obviating the need for much of what the OS does, yet users want to maintain control and ownership of their personal data. Network-delivered user interfaces can do a lot of what the desktop UI has traditionally done, but only when the user is online. I was really hoping for Ballmer and Gates to address the changing nature of computing, and not fight Apple for the design award; I really don't think the Microsoft UI juggernaut committee is going to be able to outflank the Apple design team's Zodiac runabout.
Make no mistake, multitouch is cool. And it may, eventually, be important. Apply the technology at a personal level, to the manipulation and visualization of complex data structures like a Facebook social network, and it could be a game changer. Furthermore, support for this interface method does belong in the operating system, because you need device driver support for it. But even if you buy that logic, I believe the multitouch project is inconsequential when compared with the bigger things we need from an OS. And I think the audience, both here at D6 and elsewhere, deserves to know what's really changing in Windows at a deep level. We can wait a bit before we worry about the surface.
Am I asking for too much? Check out this Microsoft video of Windows 7 and chime in with your thoughts:
Video: Multi-Touch in Windows 7
See also: Microsoft to add multitouch interface to Windows 7.
Click here for full coverage of the D: All Things Digital conference.
Rafe Needleman writes about start-ups, new technologies, and Web 2.0 products, as editor of CNET's Webware. E-mail Rafe.
But overall, I don't know how much this will reach the masses, the way the globe roomed on to the city map showed the power of the hardware's GPU. But I hope they would also evolve, 2010 is the release time given by Microsoft. So it looks appealing.
Yeah, why not? $85 for 4 gig is no big deal. I remember running windows 3.1 on 4 MEG of RAM that cost about $160. Do PCs not evolve and become cheaper? If you want to do more, you need more. If not, then you don't need to upgrade.
As to the memory requirements..... 4GB's of memory is CHEAP today, so I cannot blame Microsoft for raising those hardware requirements, though I am hoping they will 'tone them down' for the next version of Windows by removing some of the useless stuff from the operating system. GPU requirements? Get real, the requirements for Vista are NOT really that high, any notebook computer or desktop computer even with integrated graphics can run Vista with full Aero.
I've been using it since it's release, and yes, there have been little issues, but not even close to what the media portrays! Are you going to try to tell me that your OSX or iPhone has not had these same issues? I've used them both, and I can tell you, NOT any different... I've run Vista successfully on everything from a 6 year old dinasaur with 768MB to my modest AMD Dual Core 2.4G with 3Gig Ram. Yes there are upgrades needed to use the new OS, but if not, where would we still be? I'm glad I'm not still running Windows 2.0, aren't you?
It really is a shame that Vista has gotten such a bad rap that they now need to defend it with advertising. It's just another ploy from the people that hate Microsoft.
By the way, NO, I'm not a huge Microsoft fan, I use most OS's, but I'm tired of Microsoft always getting a bum rap just because they are successful and provide a good product. It's sort of the way the media is attacking the candidates this year. VERY biased. Apple is the worst at this, their Negative Ad Campaigns are really bad business. I refuse to support any company, or candidate, that spews negativity on a regular basis. Shame on them!
2. Touch screen computers are not new. Having the drivers built in the OS is OK, but requires new hardware. In order to use Multi-Touch, you have to buy new hardware (only monitors?)
3. Apple managed to keep its touch interface within good system performance, and that is due to their graphics core. Systems do not need to be pricey to perform properly (Mac Mini does not have a 'cut-down' interface compared to a high specification MacPro). We saw with Vista, that if you want to have the 'full' interface, you need a PC with higher specification than XP needed. I would be extremely surprised if tomorrow's mid-range PCs will manage to run the multi-touch interface properly
4. I hope that Microsoft has learnt that, in order to make the interface really useful, ALL the applications (or at least MOST) need to make use of it. The problem with Windows in the past, is the lack of interface cohesion and coherence between applications
This belongs to handheld gadgets, remote access etc but not the best idea for the PC.
Think again MS
If Microsoft can get this right .... hmmmm
"Network-delivered user interfaces can do a lot of what the desktop UI has traditionally done, but only when the user is online." - The UI is irrelevant as the majority of operating systems can be modified to run whatever UI shell you want.. It's the underlying OS that provides the necessary functionality to allow you to connect to a network.
It kills me when I read stuff like this from supposedly tech-savvy authors. The Windows 7 kernel will be a refined version of the kernel in Windows Server 2008 which is highly modularized already. It currently allows you to install a complete OS without any graphical UI whatsoever... but good luck trying to use your Google Docs from a command prompt.
And I really hate greasy fingertips on my display, too. Do I want to have to wipe off the display after some greasy-fingered PC tech comes by to update, fix, or demonstrate some application or setting. Yuck.
I wonder how the interface would operate on a real live machine, like most of us use... with other programs running in the background, and half the recommended RAM/CPU/ hard drive? Crash much? Cool toy, but not a revelation, to say the least.
I already use a host of apps that will benefit from this.
BTW, folks once thought the mouse was boring.
"Why do we need a mouse? How stupid.
I can type anything I need to at the command prompt.
Why do we need books?
Everything was much easier when we used scrolls."
"Apple already has that..." No they don't. MULTI Touch. MULTI.
Try touching 2 things simultaneously on your expensive iPhone and get back to us.
BTW, my WM6 phone PPC6800 has a touch screen. (Not multi.)
Has had it for years.
The iPhone is a newcomer in this area, not the innovator.
-
by Magallanes
May 28, 2008 5:48 AM PDT
- DAMN!, it's just a vista tablet version with multi touch abilities.
-
Reply to this comment
-
See all 77 Comments >>The problems with xp tablet version is the price of the hardware, a tablet pc can cost the double that their counterpart with mouse.