05-16-2003, 02:00 AM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
The Road to Windows "Longhorn": Part Two
This is a very long, and very comprehensive look at Longhorn thus far. The reason why this is so interesting to me is that Microsoft is finally replacing the GDI-based graphics system with one built on top of DirectX. You have to go read Paul's article to understand how far-reaching this change is, and even then I don't think most people will really grasp it. By moving to the model they are, Microsoft is finally creating a system whereby the graphics are resolution-independent units, not pixels. Let me restate that: NO PIXELS. This is a seriously big deal.
I believe this graphics subsystem change will trickle down to the Pocket PC eventually, but of course it will take a few years until the hardware is powerful enough to handle it. 2005 is a long time to wait, but from all appearances, Longhorn is the revolutionary OS I've been waiting for Microsoft to build, because it focuses more on the high end, modern computers than trying to stay friendly with Pentium II computers from 1998. Jettison the past and rocket into the future! Wheee! :mrgreen:
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 02:19 AM
|
|
Intellectual
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 158
|
|
Now I am confused. Paul's previous article showed that Paul installed Longhorn but with this new technollogy, will it be upgradable? I am guessing if it is, the PCs that can be upgraded must be today's state of the art.
I must say, though, it looks like at last Microsoft is going to do something equivalent to Windows 95.
Can barely wait, :mrgreen:
__________________
Just when I learned the meaning of life, they changed it.
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 04:11 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,466
|
|
Microsoft has clearly leapfrogged Apple with this DirectX composition engine. It goes far beyond what is currently possible with Quartz. Of course, Mac users will still claim Microsoft is copying OSX. :twisted:
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 04:23 AM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 384
|
|
Not yet ....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Foo Fighter
Microsoft has clearly leapfrogged Apple with this DirectX composition engine. It goes far beyond what is currently possible with Quartz. Of course, Mac users will still claim Microsoft is copying OSX. :twisted:
|
It hasn't been released yet. Therefore they haven't leapfrogged Apple yet.
You have no idea whats going on inside of Apple R&D which is about as hush as Area51 testing.
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 04:27 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,466
|
|
Re: Not yet ....
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Will T Smith
It hasn't been released yet. Therefore they haven't leapfrogged Apple yet.
You have no idea whats going on inside of Apple R&D which is about as hush as Area51 testing.
|
True, but if Apple implements features of this scale, Mac users can't claim that Microsoft is copying OSX.
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 04:27 AM
|
|
Executive Editor
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 29,160
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Reinaldo
Now I am confused. Paul's previous article showed that Paul installed Longhorn but with this new technollogy, will it be upgradable? I am guessing if it is, the PCs that can be upgraded must be today's state of the art.
|
Correct. Bare minimum video card is 128 MB and DirectX 9.0 compatible, which is limited to the current top-tier video cards from nVidia and ATI. But in two years when this technology comes out, cards like that will be more or less commonplace.
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 04:33 AM
|
|
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 384
|
|
Re: The Road to Windows "Longhorn": Part Two
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jason Dunn
... By moving to the model they are, Microsoft is finally creating a system whereby the graphics are resolution-independent units, not pixels. Let me restate that: NO PIXELS. This is a seriously big deal.
I believe this graphics subsystem change will trickle down to the Pocket PC eventually, but of course it will take a few years until the hardware is powerful enough to handle it. 2005 is a long time to wait, but from all appearances, ...
|
From what I've read, many of the tier 1 features seem within the reach of current StrongARM devices containing 2D acceleration. Basically, vector based drawing of a single UI (PocketPCs don't show multiple desktop windows only one) could be handled by any video chipset ever made by Nvidia. This really is not an overly complex problem so much as it is a paradigm shift.
The problem of different sized screens weighs far more heavily on WinCE than it does desktops. Desktop windows are expected to be resized and stacked next to one another. WinCE apps are largely to completely occupy limited screen real estate.
The 640x480 screen in the Clie's is now very coveted amongst the PocketPC folk. However, introducing such a device causes development problems of maintaing core compatibility on two different screen sizes. An traditional app run on a 640x480 screen would obviously appear smaller, or it would require a translator to scale it up to size.
A simple vector based graphics engine (no transparency or freaky animations) would be just what the doctor ordered to allow optimal portability of apps across WinCE devices of various resolutions. It would also allow PocketPC to scale upward to 800x600 and possibly 1024x768 (data Pads, just like Cpt Picards) and maintain complete compatibility.
My guess is this will come FIRST to .net and .netCF, than to WinCE as Microsoft wants .net to become lingua franca in WinCE land.
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 04:57 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,466
|
|
Re: The Road to Windows "Longhorn": Part Two
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Will T Smith
The 640x480 screen in the Clie's is now very coveted amongst the PocketPC folk.
|
It's 320x480, not VGA.
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 06:18 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,329
|
|
*sighs* Can someone tell me where Microsoft stands on Palidam (Or however the heck you spell it.) I'm not a fan of this draconian design. From what I understand (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) Longhorn is going to need specific types of hardware that is compatible with Palidam to run the OS. Please tell me I�m wrong on this.
If this is the case I won't be going the longhorn route. I won't touch it. Recommend it. Speak of it. Or bother to spit on the media if I ever come in contact with it.
|
| |
|
|
|
05-16-2003, 06:34 AM
|
|
Pontificator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,466
|
|
Well, no offense, but what choice do you have? You could stay with XP...but for how long? And it's not like you can dump Windows and go with Linux. Not if you want to run real applications.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
