Recommended Posts

oops I meant "Vista looks better THAN Win7"

Don't get me wrong, win7 is fast stable and reliable...no question it's better...but cosmetically, I'm afraid it's not.

People are not going to be able to tell this is a new version of windows, as it looks way too much like Vista. They may just not upgrade thinking its just vista, and vista has a bad rep.

But in cosmetic dept.

These are the things I prefer in Vista.

-Fade in into the login screen - not in win7 it just abruptly pop-ups after boot screen ? not very elegant.

Never noticed it. Don't particularly care as I skip the login screen.

-Toolbar is plain looking in win7 with no icons - this looked much better in vista.

I much prefer the Windows 7 taskbar. I love clean and minimal interfaces.

-Start orb glow in win7 looks odd

Not really, but I'm using 7000. I know they changed it a bit in later builds, though.

-Transparency when window is maximized does not look good at all ? should be black like in vista. Same with the taskbar.

Have to absolutely disagree with you here. The black in Vista really turned me off. I really, really hated it.

-Default background for login and installation ? it?s nice and all ? a little feminine looking but it really does not make the login screen look good or modern. And the white font ?windows 7 ultimate? at the bottom blend in too much with the background.

Don't know what you're referring to, sorry.

-The animations while coping or moving or deleting files is pretty ugly and looked better in Vista.

The animations are fine, IMHO.

That?s about it.

But although I love Win 7 so much more than Vista (win 7 screams) cosmetically win7 seems unfinished.

Edit - I would like to add the following.

--The boot screen in Win7 - is leaps and bounds better than Vista. It's hard to explain, but I get the sense that it's modern/futuristic and a look (peek) into what is coming for Win7

OK.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I think the Windows 7 GUI is leaps and bounds better than the Vista GUI.

Please don't bring Black Vipers guide into all of this. How Windows 7 handles it's services is different from Vista or XP.

Windows 7 uses "triggers" to start services only when you need them. Disabling loads of services makes little to no difference and you are only crippling Windows 7's features by doing so.

Also to add onto my post. While the argument that Windows 7 doesn't look much different from Vista, Windows 98 didn't look more different than Windows 95, Windows 98SE didn't look much different than Windows 98FE, Windows ME didn't look much different than Windows 98SE and Windows 2000 didn't look much different than Windows ME, 98FE/SE or Windows 95, but at the end of the day is, they were different, not visually, but under the hood, they were.

If anything, the one version of Windows which does look out of place is XP with it's stupid blue/silver/olive green/zune/royale themes.

Please don't bring Black Vipers guide into all of this. How Windows 7 handles it's services is different from Vista or XP.

Windows 7 uses "triggers" to start services only when you need them. Disabling loads of services makes little to no difference and you are only crippling Windows 7's features by doing so.

Also to add onto my post. While the argument that Windows 7 doesn't look much different from Vista, Windows 98 didn't look more different than Windows 95, Windows 98SE didn't look much different than Windows 98FE, Windows ME didn't look much different than Windows 98SE and Windows 2000 didn't look much different than Windows ME, 98FE/SE or Windows 95, but at the end of the day is, they were different, not visually, but under the hood, they were.

If anything, the one version of Windows which does look out of place is XP with it's stupid blue/silver/olive green/zune/royale themes.

Using the classic theme all of them look like W98, with the blue gradient bar... oh, and Royale rules :p

oops I meant "Vista looks better THAN Win7"

Don't get me wrong, win7 is fast stable and reliable...no question it's better...but cosmetically, I'm afraid it's not.

People are not going to be able to tell this is a new version of windows, as it looks way too much like Vista. They may just not upgrade thinking its just vista, and vista has a bad rep.

But in cosmetic dept.

These are the things I prefer in Vista.

-Fade in into the login screen - not in win7 it just abruptly pop-ups after boot screen ? not very elegant.

-Toolbar is plain looking in win7 with no icons - this looked much better in vista.

-Start orb glow in win7 looks odd

-Transparency when window is maximized does not look good at all ? should be black like in vista. Same with the taskbar.

-Default background for login and installation ? it?s nice and all ? a little feminine looking but it really does not make the login screen look good or modern. And the white font ?windows 7 ultimate? at the bottom blend in too much with the background.

-The animations while coping or moving or deleting files is pretty ugly and looked better in Vista.

That?s about it.

But although I love Win 7 so much more than Vista (win 7 screams) cosmetically win7 seems unfinished.

Edit - I would like to add the following.

--The boot screen in Win7 - is leaps and bounds better than Vista. It's hard to explain, but I get the sense that it's modern/futuristic and a look (peek) into what is coming for Win7

Windows 7 has a newer appearence with how you deal with things, also you just have to think that Windows 7 isn't finished and Vista is now upto SP2 RTM.

wow OP is on glue lol :D

Windows 7 got it right this time around in terms of UI, i liked it since beta and its ever so slightly more refined now... in fact awhile back when i was still using XP (i use Vista as my primary atm) i wanted XP to look like Windows 7 does today, believe it or not

i can't even go back to using Vistas default theme now, i'd prob be angry all the time haha, instead i use http://giannisgx89.deviantart.com/

this guys 'Windows 7 Style for Vista'

Like i've said, Vista's UI was great but Windows 7 builds on this and makes it more refined, more snappier and more efficient. Looking at XP now (after using Vista/7) its just so archaic, so inefficient and even more important, UGLY!

To a slight, slight degree I agree with the OP, but If Microsoft keeps the skin the way it is, ill be very happy.

And there isnt anything stopping them creating a new skin (not GUI), why dont they make it slightly less blue? And change the fish wallpaper haha.

The fish is a Betta. It's just a pun. :) I'm sure it'll be gone for RTM.

Well well I also want to throw in my honest opinion, Win 7 looks waay better then Vista.

I'm a user that customizes his Windows to no end and goes for eyecandy to the max. I love changing every part of an OS to make it look like I want and the default Windows UIs where always plain boring for me. Yeah sure XPs Luna finally made Windows stop looking like a gray something but in exchange it felt a little like some child toy.

When I installed Vista Beta 2 I was overwhelmed at first by the beauty and freshness of AERO but soon I realized there was still a bit of a XPs/98s feeling in it after it went RTM. Sorry I can't point my finger on it, it's just a feeling I have when I use Vista. Also I never liked this greenish color Vista had, of course different people like different colors but this color which could not decide if it was green or blue together with that babyblue at most places and the black maximized Windows quickly became annoying for me.

So now we are at Win7... when I first booted build 7000 I was like... wow..... this looks like Vista but it's so pretty from start to end. (Not to mention the bootscreen) No more annoying colors or black stuff, just a 100% modern looking, for the most part consistent AERO UI. I don't even felt like customizing it much, it was the first default Computer UI which I was happy with. And that comes from someone who used everything from Win98 upwards, Linux and OSX. I can't even sense a bit of this Win98/XP feeling for the most time, just in some rare places like Device Manager.

It's really as someone said here before, Vistas UI was a cocoon and 7s UI is the beautiful butterfly that evolved from it.

The only things I would like to see change in RTM are the removal of the few remaining things that where 1:1 taken over from Vista like the Close, Maximize and Minimize buttons, a fresh soundset along with a fresh iconset to shake off the last bit of old Vistaness.

Now for the OP (man this is the longest post I've ever written^^):

- I agree the fade on login was nice.

- I think the text toolbar blends well with the rest of the UI but it should be the users choice.

- I disagree, the start glow fits just fine.

- The black maximized borders where just a horrible distraction if you switched to fullscreen.

- What about it is feminine? I think it has a nice fresh look to it. (It's the same with the color pink... everyone thinks pink is a girls color whilst it is a totally normal color like blue, yellow etc. just our society taught us pink = girl)

- Ummm the animations look the same it's just they changed it to a matching color oO

Conclusion, as said Win7 has the most polished default UI I've ever seen and is by no means unfinished.

The last thing I want to talk about, I think most people just talk bad about new UIs because ever since Win95 they are used to how Windows works since the most basic things never changed and whenever some radical UI changes are introduced like the Ribbon UI people have to relearn everything because what they know does not apply anymore.

Whilst I agree this can be tough for companies and such I believe that exploring a new OS can be quite a fun thing for a normal user.

When I first used Office 2007 I almost found nothing. But I didn't accursed Microsoft and their damn new Ribbon UI, I just threw most things I knew about Office out of the window and started to discover the new Ribbon UI. After a very short amount of time I was able to use office as fast as before if not faster.

Same with Win7, out of my habit I clicked on the last point in the context menu to access screen resolutions which lead me to Personalize.

I was a bit like... umm... okay... then looked again and found it instantly. I wont blame and say Microsoft put it back where it was, I just will adapt. Technological innovations and evolution cannot happen if the users aren't willing to evolve and adapt themselves.

I believe that's a major point of Microsoft why they don't want to make a total revolution of Windows, they are scared that the userbase isn't willing to adept a learn from anew.

But if people hadn't done this in the past we would maybe still use text based OSs like DOS, I mean Bill Gates didn't said "Oh making a Graphical User Interface for PCs wont work out, people are used to text based input and a scared of new things..."

There ends my longest post ever, and remember it's all my personal opinion ;)

Oh and how would I get this small "quicklaunch thingy"?

post-107785-1241110576_thumb.png

Edited by SkyDX
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!