How We Really Designed the Look and Feel of Windows 7

Besides the Superbar, what else is new to Windows 7 that is copied from OSX?

No. The taskbar is fundamentally different from the Dock. It's YOU that hasn't been paying attention, Thurrott. The taskbar is designed as an APPLICATION launcher and switcher, with the start button and notification area thrown in as well. In this respect, it is unchanged from previous Windows versions. By comparison, the Dock has all sorts of stuff in it - folders, the Trash, minimised windows separate from launcher icons. It's a mess. The Windows 7 feature allowing you to pin folders to the Explorer icon, but not have them directly on the taskbar, is one you often complain about, but is, in fact, entirely by design. It is inkeeping with the APPLICATION-CENTRIC, not EVERYTHING/NOTHING-CENTRIC like the dock, philosophy of the taskbar. And anyone who thinks otherwise just isn't paying attention.

I went back to the quicklaunch bar. I don't keep icons on the desktop and like having having these little tiny ones right where I want them.

In the grand scheme of things does it really matter? I can't run my Windows apps on OS X and I can't buy a Mac for less than a grand. If we were talking hammers then a Mac would be the cool shiny fully automatic hammers that cost 3 - 4 times more than my trusty hammer that I use every day (as illustrated by HP's deal where you get 3 computers and a router for the cost of a Mac). It would need specialized nails and while I could get an adaptor (think Parallels or some other virtualization software) it kind of defeats the purpose of having the cool shiny automatic hammer, doesn’t it? And while the cool shiny hammer is really cool (and yes that does count for something), and I get bragging rights for just having it, at the end of the day it’s still just a hammer.

One thing that I find odd is that with the new taskbar UI in Windows 7, Microsoft is focusing on a solely graphical representation for launching and active applications over previous Windows versions which had hybrid styles (desktop icons did and still have program names, as did the running state, but the emphasis for users is now on the taskbar). However, with the Windows Live applications, once you're in the program, the emphasis is on the content within that application, hence no toolbar icons, and minimal UI graphics. So the only fancy graphics that an app should carry is with the launch icon? Did anybody else pick that up? What would that mean for the future of graphical application UI's and the integration of them within the operating system?

I think it's awful when high-level employees pull stuff out of thin air.

"If we were talking hammers then a Mac would be the cool shiny fully automatic hammers that cost 3 - 4 times more than my trusty hammer that I use every day" Nah. It'd be that aluminum flashlight with the extra long battery life that Apple advertises as "the greenest", while being solar-powered.

@qmt49: "The taskbar is designed as an APPLICATION launcher and switcher, with the start button and notification area thrown in as well....By comparison, the Dock has all sorts of stuff in it - folders, the Trash, minimised windows separate from launcher icons. It's a mess." Folders (or "stacks" now) on the Dock are clearly separated from applications by a divider. Trash is simply another folder, and it's positioned next to other folders. In Snow Leopard, windows can be minimized to their application icon by setting a preference. So the Dock is essentially applications and folders. In contrast, the Windows Taskbar has the Start Menu (an entire system's worth of data types), an application launcher/switcher, and a hybrid system notification/background process list. That's hardly "application-centric." Which you prefer is obviously up to you, but your logic here is faulty.

I don't believe the guy was specifically talking about the taskbar either, although I also don't believe that Windows 7 has much more graphical polish over Vista. In fact, the system icons in the tray notification area are downright ugly, and don't fit within the context of the taskbar, which only otherwise contains very nice looking elements. You can design very nice looking illustrated elements with minimal palettes so that scaling the object to a small size fits, you know. The black and white micro icons just don't look good IMO. The colour palette in 7 is slightly more vivid than Vista, but I would imagine that's also so that it matches those glorious HDR photos that they have for wallpapers. I would still prefer that a window titlebar and the taskbar go black and opaque when a window is maximized. Not sure about how you'd work out the logistics of changing it when a user uses Aero Peek though. I dunno if it's just me or not, but my installation of Excel doesn't support the Aero Snap option for undoing maximize. That is, I can drag by the titlebar to the top of the screen to maximize, but I can't subsequently pull it away to restore it. It doesn't happen in Word, Outlook, or Publisher. I haven't tried it on another machine either.

Waethorn: "In fact, the system icons in the tray notification area are downright ugly, and don't fit within the context of the taskbar, which only otherwise contains very nice looking elements" Ugly, yes, but much easier to "read". I always had a problem with the XP battery and network icons.

Sorry, I meant sound and network icons. The battery icon was fine.

"Spend a lot, get a lot." The first "lot" is a bigger "lot" when you get the same-sized second "lot" when you buy a PC.

"Anyone that thinks the two companies don't "borrow" extensively from each other is delusional " If that's your apology for recognizing that Apple "borrowed" it from Microsoft Windows 1.0, then so be it.

Sorry, but the Taskbar is a copy of the Dock. Yes, it has some changes, many of which are improvements over the OS X Dock, but it is still a copy. Even jumplists are copy of the menu that you can get when clicking on an application in the Dock. Jumplists certainly offer more options when the application is not currently open, taking that concept on step further, but they are basically the same thing. I'm sure Apple could easily incorporate additional items into their Dock menus as well very easily by using the plists to get stuff like most recent documents, etc. The thumbnail windows are really the same idea as the minimized windows, just larger. Even Apple has moved them to the app's icon in the expose view. Really...look at what was added to the Taskbar and you will see things that have been in the Dock for years. Large Icons Progress Indicators Running and non-running Applications Live windows (running movies, etc.) How you can claim its not a copy of the Dock is beyond me. The similarities are just to striking.

I have the same problem with excel as well. As for the windows new "superbar" You could have used something similar in Vista, XP, or any other version of Windows basically, it has been here for a while it is just now at the front. And yes the Windows Taskbar is Application Driven. Before Win 7 and Quick launch it was used as a way to switch between apps quickly and easily, with Quick launch once could now launch an App from the task bar and then be able to sort it. In Win 7 they just combined the window's control of the Task bar with the application launching of quck launch which I find quite nice.

yoshipod "Well actually Next "borrowed" it from Windows 1.0, not Apple." "the Taskbar is a copy of the Dock" So you're saying that the taskbar (Windows 7) is a copy of a copy (Mac OS X) of a copy (NeXT) of part of the UI of Windows 1. Therefore you're saying that Microsoft Windows has features that were copied from Microsoft Windows. And that's news?

Mike you are certainly correct. I meant that in the context of integrating contextual menus into the Dock/Taskbar beyond the simple open/close functionality. Developers could put additional functionality into their dock menus such as being able to control itunes play/pause/next track etc. from the dock. I don't recall seeing that before Windows 7. Just booted up Vista, opened Media player and saw nothing beyond open/close/minimize. Since this was about a comparison about the Dock and Taskbar, I assumed that was implied. My bad for not being specific enough.

"and yes I know where your opinion comes from, in the form of signed checks from Microsoft itself." No, Microsoft fired him, remember? As "guruguru" put it on Paul's other site, they removed some "excess fat and middle managers which don't do anything but go home with fat checks after reading outlook emails and going to meetings each day." It's great, though, because it leaves Mikey with more time to tell us how wonderful the company that ripped his paycheck out of his hands is. Stockholm Syndrome, anyone? "If that's your apology for recognizing that Apple "borrowed" it from Microsoft Windows 1.0, then so be it." The only apology needed is from Microsoft for foisting Windows 1.0 on an unsuspecting world. I actually used that software (well, as much as anyone could "use" that POS), and it was an abomination. Tandy DeskMate was even better. At any rate, Apple has a patent on the Dock, so your silly argument is moot. http://www.maclife.com/article/news/leggo_my_dock_oh_apple_patents_dock

mike, there isn't a wide range of opinions here. the Microsoft camp here says 'no thurrott you're nuts, Microsoft is incapable of copying anyone'. and the apple camp is 'see, told you so'. I was just saying it was nice to see you softies rail against paul for once. just an observation. I would say Orwell would be proud... of Microsoft [and IBM before them] and of you personally. You're a cog in that machine that runs 95% of the world's computer and the fact that you bring up Orwell to attack me is some serious circular logic. The ministry of truth would be happy to have you.

"Well actually Next "borrowed" it from Windows 1.0, not Apple." And as you all know, OS X was derived from NeXTStep, which Apple acquired when they bought back Jobs. Apology accepted. Case closed. Thanks for playing. Collect your parting gifts at the door.

Waethorn, Didn't MS pretty much rip off the macintosh UI when Apple handed them the source code? Was a huge lawsuit that went MS's way due to some technicality or something? Case closed, thanks for playing, collect your parting gifts at the door. So obnoxious.

Lotsa, Your opinion is SO. DEAD. WRONG. Waethorn said so.

panache Compositing desktops: First publicly shown by Microsoft, first shipped by Apple Multi-touch consumer devices? Depends on how you choose to define "consumer device" since multitouch devices predate the personal computer. Apple DID ship the multitouch interface code they bought from a 3rd party (Apple did not invent their tech) in iPhone after Microsoft shipped the multitouch code that Microsoft Research invented in Surface. Both are sold to consumers (one is "mass market" one is "vertical market") .

Mike, Compositing desktop was first shown by MS...but they were last to get it implemented, even behind Linux? Show me. Mike.....Repeat after me "Apple had multi-touch devices in the hands of millions of consumers, earning lots of profits years before MS had any shipping multi-touch products, for corporate or consumer use" It won't hurt....trust me.

panache I've posted many, many times on here how I wish Apple were still an innovative company like they were when they did Lisa and LaserWriter and didn't think "innovation" was picking next year's fashionable color. But, if it makes you feel better, yes, Lisa and Macintosh shipped before Windows 1.0x. And now you can brag that through their acquisition of NeXT, Apple finally has used the "icon at the bottom of the screen to represent a running application" visual metaphor that originated with Windows 1.0x.