Microsoft demos windows 7. Critics underwhelmed.

[Phyphor]

I wish Microsoft would start focusing on performance rather than adding a bunch of pointless features that most people don't need or want. I'd gladly pony up the money for an OS that would increase performance noticeably, but I'm not going to spend $100-$300 to change the way my icons look.

Give that man a cookie!

[Phyphor]

"I fail to feel the angst about touch-screens functionality, though.  A good portion of the retail establishments I visit use touch-screens - especially restaurants."

Sure, touch screens are great.

I use them all the time.

But I don't want fingerprints on MY monitor.

I don't give a damn about fingerprints on a monitor/display I use incidentally for maybe 20-30 seconds while I'm getting cash or groceries.

But the absolute LAST thing I want to have to do is try to read a 200+ page system architecture document through a bunch of fingerprints. People at my office know that if they touch the surface of my monitor, they're going to catch three levels of hell.

I can't even begin to imagine what kind of frigging mess would be created if you were snacking on something greasy while you were playing the virtual piano.

It's a stupid idea in search of a functional necessity on a home computer.

Wholeheartedly agreed.  Touchscreens are fine for simple stuff, or occasionally something flashy (like that piano thing, ) but forcing you to use it as part of the base OS?  WTF?

[Firethorn]

Fingerprint?

If it's the kind with a full-fingertip impression, they're ridiculously easy to trick. Mythbusters did it, and so did a guy in Japan...using melted gummi bears as a positive for a fingerprint just lifted off a surface.

It's a slide scan.  You swipe your finger across a little bar.

Besides, while I'm leery of them being used for things like ATMs or charge cards, I already figure that if you have my laptop you're going to get into it.  I don't store critical information on it.

[Ben]

But I don't want fingerprints on MY monitor.

I'm with you Mike. I have a data collection Toughbook I use at work, and love the touchscreen for it's intended purpose of quickly and easily being able to move through menus while in a bouncy airplane (using a mouse is an invitation to a barf-fest). For home use though, I just can't see any situations where I would prefer a touchscreen to my trackball (besides not wanting to clean my monitor daily).

[Gewehr98]

That's not how I read the article.  I read it as an additional "touch enabled" capability, not "touch-enforced".  IOW, if you have a touch-screen monitor, you can select that optional interface and play like it's a big iPhone, otherwise, it defaults to the familiar mouse and keyboard. I doubt Microshaft's that naieve.

But yeah, I figure whomever touches Mike's monitor screen will indeed get a Rod of Ra upside the head, even if it were a touchscreen version. 

[Ben]

I figured it would be either way, I just can't think of any stuff I do at home in which touchscreen would be an advantage or faster than a mouse.

[K Frame]

"But yeah, I figure whomever touches Mike's monitor screen will indeed get a Rod of Ra upside the head, even if it were a touchscreen version."

After which they shall be introduced to the steel roller god and shall immediately come into touch with their inner thin red slurry.

[zahc]

I don't get the fuss with solid state drives. Everybody worships them as if they were better. I doubt they are any more reliable than HDDs, sure they use a bit less power, but HDDs can be read and written to forever, have way bigger capacity. For a device like a net appliance, I don't see why you'd want a flash drive whatsoever.

[41magsnub]

I don't get the fuss with solid state drives. Everybody worships them as if they were better. I doubt they are any more reliable than HDDs, sure they use a bit less power, but HDDs can be read and written to forever, have way bigger capacity. For a device like a net appliance, I don't see why you'd want a flash drive whatsoever.

The flash drive in my Fujitsu tablet is wonderful.  It lasts something like 11 hours on a standard battery.  I wouldn't have paid for it myself, but since work was picking up the tab...

For a device that is running on AC power I would agree.

Now, when they get to the next level and they get cheaper, bigger, and faster then we'll talk.

[Phyphor]

I don't get the fuss with solid state drives. Everybody worships them as if they were better. I doubt they are any more reliable than HDDs, sure they use a bit less power, but HDDs can be read and written to forever, have way bigger capacity. For a device like a net appliance, I don't see why you'd want a flash drive whatsoever.

 
Yea, that's fair true, I still have a working IDE Seagate 100MB hard disk running MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1..... In a Pentium 200 MHZ.

I haven't fired it up in a long time, but the last time I did it fired up just like it always did,.......

[Manedwolf]

I don't get the fuss with solid state drives. Everybody worships them as if they were better. I doubt they are any more reliable than HDDs, sure they use a bit less power, but HDDs can be read and written to forever, have way bigger capacity. For a device like a net appliance, I don't see why you'd want a flash drive whatsoever.

 
Yea, that's fair true, I still have a working IDE Seagate 100MB hard disk running MS-DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1..... In a Pentium 200 MHZ.

I haven't fired it up in a long time, but the last time I did it fired up just like it always did,.......

I found a TI Professional with a 10mb Winchester hard drive in someone's garage and plugged it in. It started up, and let you run programs. O_o  ...Sounded like a downshifting semi, but...

[Firethorn]

I don't get the fuss with solid state drives. Everybody worships them as if they were better. I doubt they are any more reliable than HDDs,

I've had three HDs quit on me, and my thumbdrive that went through the washing machine still works.  Kinda like a VHS tape vs a DVD, there are different failure modes.

Still, from what I understand the most probable failures by far for SSDs are write failures - the problem is detected immediately.  You're more likely to lose data with a HD developing read errors.

sure they use a bit less power, but HDDs can be read and written to forever

The MTBF for a realistically used flash drive is at or higher MTBF for HDs.  The less power becomes real important for portable devices, whether they be MP3 players or laptops.

Sure, that HD can sit on a shelf in a fairly controlled climate for decades without failing, but so can't flash drives.

have way bigger capacity. For a device like a net appliance, I don't see why you'd want a flash drive whatsoever.

A ways back, it made slashdot, production of the smallest HD form factor ceased, flash had become cheaper.  A net appliance would be EXACTLY the reason to have flash over a hd - hard drives today are actually only economical in larger storage, and a 'net appliance' only needs a few GB(realistically).