Windows Vista

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Internet Explorer 7+ vs. Internet Explorer 7

June 28, 2006
Leave a comment

I don’t know about you, but I had never even heard of the concept of “Internet Explorer 7+” until I read a post from the MSBLOG that explains what IE 7+ is and what the difference is between it and regular IE 7:

Vista has a core of security – I mean the whole thing is based on security and making everything incredibly secure. Having the 7+ identifies that the Vista copy of IE7 has extended features that integrate with the operating system itself, such as Parental Controls which restricts what specific users access, and Protected Mode which helps virtualise areas of the disk so that if anything harmful access the machine, then it won’t attack the computer.

So basically, the 7+ version is the Vista one and will harbour some of the core security features of the operating system, whilst 7 is just for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 which won’t be less secure in anyway [sic] and will still have all the same features as 7+ except not have the core operating system parts.

WinFX Renamed to .NET Framework 3.0

June 22, 2006
1 Comment

According to a post on “Somasegar’s WebLog”, WinFX has been renamed to .NET Framework 3.0.

When speaking to developers about WinFX one question that repeatedly comes up is, “WinFX sounds great, but what happens to .NET?” .NET Framework has becomes the most successful developer platform in the world. Developers know and love .NET.

The .NET Framework has always been at the core of WinFX, but the WinFX brand didn’t convey this. The WinFX brand helped us introduce the incredible innovations in terms of Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF), Windows Communication Foundation (WCF), Windows Workflow Foundation (WF) and the newly christened Windows CardSpace (WCS) formerly known under the codename “InfoCard.” The brand also created an unnatural discontinuity between previous versions of our framework and the current version.

With this in mind we have decided to rename WinFX to the .NET Framework 3.0. .NET Framework 3.0 aptly identifies the technology for exactly what it is — the next version of our developer framework.

The change is in name only and will not affect the technologies being delivered as part of the product. The .NET Framework 3.0 is still comprised of the existing .NET Framework 2.0 components, including ASP.NET, WinForms, ADO.NET, additional base class libraries and the CLR, as well as new developer-focused innovative technologies in WPF, WCF, WF and WCS:

The .NET Framework 3.0 will still ship with Windows Vista, and will be available down-level for Windows XP and Windows Server 2003 as planned. This change doesn’t affect in any way the ship schedules of either Windows Vista or the .NET Framework 3.0 itself.

What I find weird is that .NET Framework 3.0 doesn’t seem to be a new version of the framework per se, but it seems to be an extention to the existing .NET Framework 2.0.

I think Microsoft is trying to encourage developers to utilize WinFX by marketing it as the next version of the .NET Framework. To me, “.NET Framework 3.0″ certainly does sound a lot more “friendly” and approachable than “WinFX.”

But is WinFX really a new version of .NET?

It depends on how you look at it. On the one hand, WinFX seems more like an “add-on” package to the .NET Framework than an upgrade. But on the other hand, some program upgrades do indeed just add new features while for the most part leaving pre-existing components of the program alone.

For me, and I’m guessing for many other developers, this news was strange and unexpected. I think it’s probably because we had a different mindset of what we thought WinFX was going to be.

But this name change has let me know that I’ll be able to use my existing .NET Framework knowledge and experience to harness the power of WinFX. And that is very exciting news.

Windows Interface and Icons: Trademarked?

June 15, 2006
3 Comments

Windows icons aren’t used in just Windows. They’re everywhere: in software and on websites.

I haven’t been able to find any information on the Microsoft website that prohibits the use of these icons, so I guess that means it’s okay, right?

For Windows XP, maybe. But according to a screenshot of the “About Windows” dialog in Windows Vista Business posted on the SuperSite for Windows:

The Windows Vista™ Business operating system and its user interface are protected by trademark and other pending or existing intellectual property rights in the United States and other countries.

Of course, the OS name at the beginning of the sentance will vary if you’re using a different edition of Windows Vista.

But compare this to the legal info found in the “About Windows” dialog in Windows XP:

Copyright © 1981-2001 Microsoft Corporation

Yep, just a copyright notice.

Obviously, the legal information in the About Windows dialog has changed significantly from Windows XP to Windows Vista.

Does this mean that programmers and web developers will be unable to use elements of the Vista interface, including icons? If so, does this interface protection cover just Vista itself? Or does it also encompass programs included with Vista, such as Windows Media Player 11 and Windows Internet Explorer 7? If IE7 is protected with a “trademarked interface,” does that mean that usage of the IE7 feed icon is illegal? What other implications might this possibly have?

I have previously considered the use of Windows XP icons on websites to be okay. Many popular sites use them, and Microsoft hasn’t complained about it as far as I know. In addition, the usage of Windows icons presents a consistent user experience for new PC and Internet users.

But it looks like this might be changing. For me as a programmer and web developer, I would find it very helpful if Microsoft would make it clear what exactly they want to prohibit and what they want to allow.

What do you think?

Microsoft Considers Atom to Be an RSS Format

May 20, 2006
Leave a comment

Looks like Microsoft will be considering Atom an “RSS format” in Windows Vista.

From the Windows Vista Developer Center RSS homepage:

Windows Vista will support all common RSS formats, including: RSS 1.0, 2.0 and Atom 0.3. We will support Atom 1.0 when it’s released.

And from the RSS Support in Longhorn article:

RSS, as we use it in this document, refers not to a single format (such as RSS 2.0), but to the general concept of feeds of syndicated content. It should be considered to cover all feed formats that meet the basic criteria of updateable [sic] collections of items.

I do see why Microsoft has chosen to define RSS this way, and at the same time I don’t.

There really isn’t a term that exclusively encapsulates both “RSS” and “Atom.” You could say the word “feed,” though that can include other formats such as OPML.

But don’t you think “feed” is more technically accurate and user-friendly than “RSS” when describing both RSS and Atom?

Vista Release Date: October 2006?

February 15, 2006
Leave a comment

I noticed that a recent Neowin article mentions that Windows Vista will be released in the mid-end of October 2006, to coincide with the five-year anniversary of the release date of Windows XP.

Now that I think of it, I’m surprised someone didn’t guess that beforehand.

← Older posts
Newer posts →