Longhorn Pirated Already

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2003-12-02 11:21am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3255120.stm

I pity the fools who try and use it at this stage

Embracer Of Darkness · Post by **Embracer Of Darkness** » 2003-12-02 12:37pm

Longhorn has been pirated for ages, and I assure you (personally), that the latest builds work fine.

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2003-12-02 12:44pm

Embracer Of Darkness wrote:Longhorn has been pirated for ages, and I assure you (personally), that the latest builds work fine.

I know theres been copies floating round the net, but this was the first I'd heard of them actually being sold.

While the latest builds may work fine, they're still pre-alpha, which is why I've refrained from playing with them yet.

Jason von Evil · Post by **Jason von Evil** » 2003-12-02 02:14pm

What is Long Horn anyways?

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2003-12-02 02:15pm

Aya wrote:What is Long Horn anyways?

Next version of Windows. Meant to be finished in 2005.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2003-12-02 05:52pm

I find it funny as hell the Pre-Beta, Pre Alpha versions work better then the finals in alot of cases with Applications

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2003-12-02 05:55pm

that's because they haven't finished putting all the bugs into it yet. errm, i mean, 'extras'.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-02 06:18pm

Darth_Zod wrote:that's because they haven't finished putting all the bugs into it yet. errm, i mean, 'extras'.

It is hardly extras. The real meat and potatoes of Longhorn have yet to be integrated (WinFS, the 3D UI).

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-12-02 09:24pm

From the screenshots I saw, at this point Longhorn is just Windows XP with a bit more eye candy and some useless extras (embedded crap, like WinME compared to Win98) and I doubt that's all there is to it, so it must be far from finished. Hell, to me it looks far from "started".

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-02 09:32pm

Slartibartfast wrote:From the screenshots I saw, at this point Longhorn is just Windows XP with a bit more eye candy and some useless extras (embedded crap, like WinME compared to Win98) and I doubt that's all there is to it, so it must be far from finished. Hell, to me it looks far from "started".

Like I said, the UI and filesystem are just XP placeholders for now. Most of the major changes haven't even been implemented yet.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2003-12-02 10:11pm

The Kernel wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote:From the screenshots I saw, at this point Longhorn is just Windows XP with a bit more eye candy and some useless extras (embedded crap, like WinME compared to Win98) and I doubt that's all there is to it, so it must be far from finished. Hell, to me it looks far from "started".
Like I said, the UI and filesystem are just XP placeholders for now. Most of the major changes haven't even been implemented yet.

A 3d UI you say? Only one immediately imaginable is the one from Jurassic Park.What's the real one going to be like?

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-02 10:21pm

A 3d UI sounds interesting.....perhaps even unnecessary, in some ways. Too much fluff and too complicated.

We'll see how it goes in 2005.

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-02 10:53pm

It isn't truly 3D so much as it uses your 3D graphics card to put in certain 3D elements. Call it a proto-3D UI. We'll know more about it soon I'm sure.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-02 11:04pm

This that so called "fileless" OS that I think Uts might have told me about?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2003-12-02 11:13pm

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:This that so called "fileless" OS that I think Uts might have told me about?

It's not exactly fileless; it uses a structure similar to and SQL database. For more info, go here:

Cnet

Slartibartfast · Post by **Slartibartfast** » 2003-12-02 11:41pm

The Kernel wrote:
Slartibartfast wrote:From the screenshots I saw, at this point Longhorn is just Windows XP with a bit more eye candy and some useless extras (embedded crap, like WinME compared to Win98) and I doubt that's all there is to it, so it must be far from finished. Hell, to me it looks far from "started".
Like I said, the UI and filesystem are just XP placeholders for now. Most of the major changes haven't even been implemented yet.

I know. My post was a consequence of you saying it

SPOOFE · Post by **SPOOFE** » 2003-12-03 12:54am

It isn't truly 3D so much as it uses your 3D graphics card to put in certain 3D elements.

So it's a 2.5D UI, then...

Ah, well. As long as I can turn it off, I'm a happy SPOOFEr!

RedImperator · Post by **RedImperator** » 2003-12-03 01:02am

Can anybody please explain to me WHY you need a 3d user interface? Anyone? Hello?

Vertigo1 · Post by **Vertigo1** » 2003-12-03 01:25am

Darth_Zod wrote:that's because they haven't finished putting all the bugs into it yet. errm, i mean, 'extras'.

Don't forget Palladium.

Spanky The Dolphin · Post by **Spanky The Dolphin** » 2003-12-03 01:35am

RedImperator wrote:Can anybody please explain to me WHY you need a 3d user interface? Anyone? Hello?

Cause it's purdy...

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2003-12-03 04:59am

RedImperator wrote:Can anybody please explain to me WHY you need a 3d user interface? Anyone? Hello?

I read somewhere that the idea is to use your graphics card more, to take work off the CPU.

Tribun · Post by **Tribun** » 2003-12-03 08:58am

Win98 SE was the last OS without needless junk.
What M$ did now is just put unnessecary stuff into a OS. A OS, by definition, has to be as small as possible. But M$ seems to think that they had to produce a x.x GB monster. (for comparison, Win98 Se only uses 300MB as maximum)
Who needs this totally idiotic UI? for example. It only eats CPU power.

Embracer Of Darkness · Post by **Embracer Of Darkness** » 2003-12-03 09:35am

I like the perdy interface in Windows XP.

It's very easy on the eyes, and it makes the computer so much less stressful to work on for long periods of time. Besides, it's not like your computer can't handle it or anything, or I should hope so nowadays.

Not to mention the Bliss wallpaper. *Drool.*

Sharp-kun · Post by **Sharp-kun** » 2003-12-03 10:21am

Tribun wrote: It only eats CPU power.

As I said, I've heard the idea is to use the Graphics card for it, thus saving CPU power.

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2003-12-03 11:07am

i'm firm in my belief that any operating system after windows 95 was merely an add-on.