Google's latest Chrome OS build looks ridiculously familiar

They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery and we know the tech world is filled implementation from rival platforms but Google appears to be throwing in the towel on original ideas, via Microsoft-news.com

First, to all the Google lovers that will be defending the platform in the comments, we know that Microsoft, Apple, and Google have all copied ideas from each other, such as Apple’s ‘Notification Center’ on iOS being a closely modified rip from Android. But this, this is not even trying.

Take a look at the screenshot above, does it look familiar? If we cropped out the shelf (task bar) we bet that you would guess that it is OS X and not Google Chrome. If you take a look at the shelf, look familiar? You should say yes if you have ever used Windows 7.

While we wait for the trolling in the comments below, we are well aware that Microsoft and Apple have copied Google and this could be retaliation but for Chrome OS to succeed, it needs to be different. Simply taking the best from both, combining them, and calling it a new OS, is not the right strategy for improving the computing platform. We are looking for Google to innovate, not copy and paste

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

A 13-inch tablet from Toshiba? Yep.

Next Story

Republique - an innovative mobile experience

178 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I like it. It's simplistic. It's something I'm used to seeing since Atari ST era: menus and icons. When I sometimes leave my Mac or Windows/Linux computer turned on I hide the application windows and admire the desktop picture (not that I do that a lot).

I like how a "news article" flat out states what the best strategy is not.

That's not news - it is a personal opinion which has no place in news articles. Editorial, maybe.

"Simply taking the best from both, combining them, and calling it a new OS, is not the right strategy..."

I dunno, sounds like a bloody good strategy to me!

Personally I really like both are features, so no complaints here. Copying - maybe, but thats for lawyers to worry about, I'm just happy to see some awesome new features added to the product. Plus, I don't really see the point changing something just for the hell of it as op seems to suggest, if its already good and you cant improve on it, then why not leave it as is?

Yeah I was going to say that it looked a little like iOS, minus the 'taskbar' implementation of course, and on the iPad for example...

At least it is a good looking rip. I hope they change it to use tiles. Merging with Android or starting a next generation platform that Android can merge with would be better. They should not be running two platforms that are incompatible with the apps of the other.

I know this site has gone downhill, but someone please fix this atrocity of a paragraph that appears on the front page:

If you like the Windows 7 task bard and OS X app launcher, you will love the latest Chrome OS build as it rips both of those features and has not shame about it.

for Chrome OS to succeed, it needs to be different

I disagree. The best of anything is very often the best of everything.

Fish said,

I disagree. The best of anything is very often the best of everything.

Same. Changing things for the fun of it or doing things just to be "different" do not equal a good and well made system. Innovation and change are good, but only when they are of an actual benefit. A mix of UIs that are proven to work may well be the correct way to go.

It actually looks like a marrige between iOS and Windows 7.

Google has also been picking up exact design implementations from Bing too, for their own search engine.

M_Lyons10 said,
Poor Google. They seem completely out of original ideas...

When is the last time anyone actually ahd an original idea? The major players have borrowed from each other since Gates and Jobs visited Xerox/Parc and pre-announced their respective GUI-based OS'. I believe MS actually announced first, Apple delivered first.

Anyway, an OS is only as good as its apps.

I was actually pretty excited about this when I seen it posted, but found out it will not work on a CR-48 Chromebook which is what Google sent me, so now I am bummed again!! I wanted this on my chromebook!

Hahaiah said,
What a terrible thing to do. Take the best of all existing interfaces and use them. wait

I was thinking this exact thing; take what people love about each of the current offerings smash em together and whets not to like? Seems like a pretty good idea to me. Unoriginal sure but a good idea nonetheless.

Why can't Windows look like this??

I actually like the new look of ChromeOS looks, mainly because I like how Windows 7 looks, but to me ChromeOS is still just a browser, even if it now looks like a traditional OS.

I'll give some credit to Google for making their OS look like more familiar OSes, like iOS and Windows, but, like I said above, it's still just a browser.

Gracias, pero no.

A340600 said,
Why can't Windows look like this??

I actually like the new look of ChromeOS looks, mainly because I like how Windows 7 looks, but to me ChromeOS is still just a browser, even if it now looks like a traditional OS.

I'll give some credit to Google for making their OS look like more familiar OSes, like iOS and Windows, but, like I said above, it's still just a browser.

Gracias, pero no.


Who cares if it is just a browser? If it works it works for your daily tasks. Your average user just surfs the web, looks at pics, videos and writes a couple of documents.

The only problem I have with Chrome OS is that it is NOT priced accordingly. At that point I'll spend a $100 more and get a decent laptop.

UndergroundWire said,

Who cares if it is just a browser? If it works it works for your daily tasks. Your average user just surfs the web, looks at pics, videos and writes a couple of documents.

The only problem I have with Chrome OS is that it is NOT priced accordingly. At that point I'll spend a $100 more and get a decent laptop.

Well, I just don't want to spend money on, well, just a browser. Chrome is my default browser on Windows. I just don't know about using nothing on it on a laptop. At least not at the current price.

I'd buy my dad a Chromebook 'cause he'd probably only use the browser in Windows, plus I can set Chrome to Spanish for him, which is something I can't do at the moment on Windows, not unless I pay Microsoft, but I use more than just a browser on Windows.

A340600 said,

I'd buy my dad a Chromebook 'cause he'd probably only use the browser in Windows, plus I can set Chrome to Spanish for him, which is something I can't do at the moment on Windows, not unless I pay Microsoft, but I use more than just a browser on Windows.

Yes, I agree with you and the situation with your dad. Just like you I have considered this but I can't justify the price point for just a browser.

A340600 said,
Why can't Windows look like this??

I actually like the new look of ChromeOS looks, mainly because I like how Windows 7 looks, but to me ChromeOS is still just a browser, even if it now looks like a traditional OS.

I'll give some credit to Google for making their OS look like more familiar OSes, like iOS and Windows, but, like I said above, it's still just a browser.

Gracias, pero no.

But, Windows can look like this... Windows UI options are the most malleable of any OS in existence, even the XWindows restricted Windows Managers.

You don't want explorer, change it, you don't want the Metro Start Page, change it, you want a custom theme engine, change it. (This use to be more popular with regular users, but as Microsoft's 'tastes' fit the average consumer, UI modify products have becomes less popular.)

Even going back to Windows 3.1, a lot of users replaced Progman.exe with Norton desktop, which was a far superior experience to Program Manager, and beyond the integrated file manager features, it used a 'grid icon' desktop metaphor, ironically like ChromeOS and iOS and Android use today, but that was 20 years ago, and the icon grid had 'object' intelligence.

I get tired of Windows doesn't look like I want, blah blah.. Well beyond WP7, Windows from 3.1 and NT to Windows 7 to even WindowsCE are highly customizable, which is why ATMs and other non-traditional UIs are easily turned on and used instead of Explorer and the 'consumer OS' UI features provided by Microsoft.

Some versions of Windows do away with the GUI and only have an HTTP server, some do away with the shell/desktop and offer a highly locked and security Application shell, like the ATM example.


thenetavenger said,

But, Windows can look like this... Windows UI options are the most malleable of any OS in existence, even the XWindows restricted Windows Managers.

...

I get tired of Windows doesn't look like I want, blah blah.. Well beyond WP7, Windows from 3.1 and NT to Windows 7 to even WindowsCE are highly customizable, which is why ATMs and other non-traditional UIs are easily turned on and used instead of Explorer and the 'consumer OS' UI features provided by Microsoft.


Actually, my comment about why can't Windows look like ChromeOS was meant in jest :-)

Google is obviously being inspired heavily (it's only "copying" when Microsoft does it) from Windows 7 AND iOS/OS X with its OS new UI.

I know Windows can be customized. I bought WindowBlinds but haven't used it on Windows 7, as I like how the OS looks.

why is all this being pinned on google? it's the chromium team making it look like this, google is just adding on their features and calling it good

Why completely redesign a UI and make the user learn everything again.
Look at the flack MS is getting for Metro.

That being said, this is one of the worst articles I've seen posted on here.

Lingwo said,
Why completely redesign a UI and make the user learn everything again.
Look at the flack MS is getting for Metro.

That being said, this is one of the worst articles I've seen posted on here.


Trust me a user knows how to use a desktop. It's been around a lot longer than a Start Screen.

xpclient said,
So what? Only Microsoft has the license to copy? Look at IE9 whose UI is a copy of Chrome.

Maybe you should elaborate on that and show some evidence seeing as IE9 looks nothing like Chrome.

neo158 said,

Maybe you should elaborate on that and show some evidence seeing as IE9 looks nothing like Chrome.

Maybe he is talking about the transparent theme of the browser. Chrome was first to do it then Firefox and IE copied it?

UndergroundWire said,

Maybe he is talking about the transparent theme of the browser. Chrome was first to do it then Firefox and IE copied it?


Wasn't Opera the first? You know, they are always the first^^

sanctified said,
Now neowin it's inciting fanboy wars?

The best part they are giving people warning on this. How stupid is this. They have no idea what they are doing and are making the rules up as they go. PATHETIC!

I don't think it looks like OS X at all, maybe iOS. Also, its resemblance to Windows 7 is debatable. To me it could look like Windows 7 or a distro of Linux or a custom launcher on Android. However, I can see your point.

A taskbar or launcher hasn't been original for so long and Google has never been original. Yes, it does look similar but touch is all the rave now so what do you expect it to look like. It's a standard design that works well.

Functionality and features is were I would be looking for differences and you can't tell much from screenshots.

oceanmotion said,
A taskbar or launcher hasn't been original for so long and Google has never been original. Yes, it does look similar but touch is all the rave now so what do you expect it to look like. It's a standard design that works well.

Functionality and features is were I would be looking for differences and you can't tell much from screenshots.

Damn too bad I have the CR-48 $300 isn't bad for the Acer one but not spending the $$ just to see a desktop.

Randall_Lind said,
So does that mean Chome OS will no longer be booting in to the web browser on a Chomebook?

It still will. You have to switch to Dev mode to get the latest dev release and then you will see what you see in this "news" article.

Also, it doesn't work on the CR-48 model. Only the Samsung and Acer model for now.

I don't really care if these companies rip of each other... I actually think it's a good thing, I can have a unified UI across every device I own if companies keep this up!

Either way, I'm thinking about buying a chromebook now because of those two screenshots, the UI on Chrome OS now looks beautiful!

I really don't care if they stole from Windows or OS X, as long as it's more polished than Windows. I think it looks quite pretty anyways.

Rudy said,
It looks like the ****** child of OSX and Win7

You know, 'love' child would've worked just fine, but that wasn't eloquent enough, was it?

THolman said,

You know, 'love' child would've worked just fine, but that wasn't eloquent enough, was it?

To be honest with you I never expected that word to be blocked.... and when I noticed it was...I just didn't care enough to change it

It's a design (or pattern of it) to what most people are used to, it's generally being useful and it's time-tested. Don't fix what isn't broken, don't reinvent the wheel, especially if the result is rectangular tiles.
As a whole Chrome OS thing is a load of dingo's kidneys, though.

Article stated

While we wait for the trolling in the comments below, we are well aware that Microsoft and Apple have copied Google and this could be retaliation but for Chrome OS to succeed, it needs to be different. Simply taking the best from both, combining them, and calling it a new OS, is not the right strategy for improving the computing platform. We are looking for Google to innovate, not copy and paste


Epic !

Personally, I like what the Verge says better....


The newest update to Google's Chrome OS is bringing the browser-based operating system a lot closer to a traditional windowing environment. Development channel (the least stable build) version 19.0.1048.17 adds Google's hardware-accelerated Aura UI and window manager, bringing a desktop, overlapping windows (pictured above), a Windows-style taskbar, and a Launchpad-esque app launcher (pictured below) to the platform.

According to the project's wiki, the goal of Aura is to use hardware acceleration to achieve more computationally intensive tasks like large-scale animated transitions and effects as well as to provide the basis for a flexible windowing system. Aside from Aura, other new features in the latest dev channel release include support for new file types (tar, gz, and bzip2), updates to the local audio and video player, and new modes for multiple monitor handling. Unfortunately, early-adopting Cr-48 owners are out of luck

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4...ardware-acceleration-update

The article here is troll bait and leaves out details in favor of kinda bashing Google for copying.

efjay said,

So I guess its ok to steal other's ideas as long as a positive article is written about it...

Nope, its not OK to leave out key information and write an article to entice people to respond and troll. Go ahead and include the crap but at least leave in ALL the details about the update.

Cyborg_X said,

100% wrong there.

Maybe I should clarify what I said...

The Verge doesnt write articles like THIS just to generate traffic.

techbeck said,

Maybe I should clarify what I said...

The Verge doesnt write articles like THIS just to generate traffic.

Please correct your statement again. I don't consider this an article or writing.

UndergroundWire said,

Please correct your statement again. I don't consider this an article or writing.

Well damn.....

The Verge does not pull stunts like this to generate traffic. Better??

techbeck said,
Personally, I like what the Verge says better....

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4...ardware-acceleration-update

The article here is troll bait and leaves out details in favor of kinda bashing Google for copying.

The article you cite is troll bait as well... Google Adding in features OS X and Windows have had for 7 years, and it is 'awesome'?

Also the fact that ChromeOS exposes WebGl as a part of this strategy and doesn't give a crap that security experts are screaming of the danger.

(If Microsoft opened DirectX up to websites, do you think people would be so 'happy' to adopt it and think it is a good idea to let shader and GP-GPU code run unrestricted on your video card, really?)

thenetavenger said,

The article you cite is troll bait as well... Google Adding in features OS X and Windows have had for 7 years, and it is 'awesome'?

Huh? where in the article on TheVerge does it say anything about features Win and OSX had for 7 years and that it was awesome? TheVerge stated that Chrome borrowed from both companies and gave info about the update.

The "article" posted here and on TheVerge is very different.

techbeck said,

Huh? where in the article on TheVerge does it say anything about features Win and OSX had for 7 years and that it was awesome? TheVerge stated that Chrome borrowed from both companies and gave info about the update.

The "article" posted here and on TheVerge is very different.

You are dealing with someone who hates Google because Google kills people (Seriously, I'm not lying). Prepare to laugh.

http://www.neowin.net/news/goo...ly-familiar#comment-1739763

techbeck said,

haha, funny stuff. I personally know Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, and Cupid.

If this was true, it would be front page news.

I always knew something was wrong with him. I just didn't realize it was that bad. Anyway, I sent it to Google. If he suddenly stops posting, then I guess he was right all along?

What I find as a dumb and dangerous trend is webapps becoming popular. I hate having to use my web browser for everything! Google Talk never getting an update on the client in favor of signing into Gmail for Gtalk...

ObiWanToby said,
What I find as a dumb and dangerous trend is webapps becoming popular. I hate having to use my web browser for everything! Google Talk never getting an update on the client in favor of signing into Gmail for Gtalk...

What does the native client do that can't be done in-browser?

thealexweb said,

What does the native client do that can't be done in-browser?

Maximum performance and direct hardware access.

Phouchg said,

Maximum performance and direct hardware access.

But for a task as small as video messaging those points aren't really important.

thealexweb said,

But for a task as small as video messaging those points aren't really important.

It's not like most browsers these days use hardware accelerated 2D rendering, have hardware accelerated video codecs (H.264) and have dabbled into 3D graphics (Flash and WebGL), is it? Nothing is really important to consumers until it's made so by their overlords.

ObiWanToby said,
What I find as a dumb and dangerous trend is webapps becoming popular. I hate having to use my web browser for everything! Google Talk never getting an update on the client in favor of signing into Gmail for Gtalk...

With HTML 5 there will be compelling web apps. They just aren't here yet.

MorganX said,

With HTML 5 there will be compelling web apps. They just aren't here yet.

So all you web people should stop selling what isn't even ready yet. It's 10 years late and still isn't ready. Come to think of it, web people are big on being late, it's kind of fashion thing among them.

I hate having to download stupid plugins. I like the Gmail calling to land line phones feature, but I'd rather do it in a client than worrying about what browser I want to use. I can't use Waterfox if I want to use special plugins.

Phouchg said,

So all you web people should stop selling what isn't even ready yet. It's 10 years late and still isn't ready. Come to think of it, web people are big on being late, it's kind of fashion thing among them.

Me personally, I'm not a web person or selling. However, we do have web apps in the enterprise that are quite nice and full featured. I believe the MS Lync client will be full HTML 5 for tablets. touch.facebook.com is quite nice. When standards are involved things are always late, but with HTML 5 its getting there.

Having said that, Windows 8 Metro Apps are not are far from being a "web" only environment. Fullscreen yes (for Metro).

I'm actually excited to see what Indies can do with HTML 5. The majore software houses are boring and have no (limited) style.

ObiWanToby said,
What I find as a dumb and dangerous trend is webapps becoming popular. I hate having to use my web browser for everything! Google Talk never getting an update on the client in favor of signing into Gmail for Gtalk...

It is about information tracking... Google doesn't make money off any App or OS. PERIOD. They make money of the tracking of trends and the data and queries based on the users they can sell to companies and governments.

They don't seem to have any morals about selling information to Governments that have used the data to literally hunt down and kill people in the countries either. (Several African countries consider Google their FBI/CIA, and I PERSONALLY know people that were killed and fled their countries because of data Google sold to the government. Serious information, like Women studying and things that the governments did not allow.)

Go Google, support them, and when you see people butchered, be proud you helped it happen....

thenetavenger said,
I PERSONALLY know people that were killed and fled their countries because of data Google sold to the government.

What kind of information do you have on Alien landings? Is Elvis really dead? Should I be concerned about "radio waves" is the government secretly sending subliminal messages through this? One more question, Did the U.S. land on the moon, if not where was this story staged?

Edit: I lied, one more question: Is there a Jersey Devil?

Ladies And Gentlemen, thenetavenger. You can't make this stuff up. This will be a classic. Thank you.

zikalify said,
I cried when I saw this when I tried Chrome OS a few weeks ago. I liked it booted into a browser!!!

Windows 8 also boots into a browser-like experience for kids playing Cut the Rope and doing Facebook-like time-pass.

zikalify said,
I cried when I saw this when I tried Chrome OS a few weeks ago. I liked it booted into a browser!!!

Funny, people were 'less' impressed when the UI of Windows 98 could all be ran inside the browser, called it a bastardization of the internet and were freaked out that it was a security risk. (Folders, the Desktop, etc were all HTML content if you wanted and could be accessed and browsed by a browser. People even wrote their own .ASP and .HTM files for folders to create folder level applications in Windows 98.

It is fun to see variations of ideas that were spit on because Microsoft had them 15 years ago are now COOL because Google 're' invented them.

First, to all the Google lovers that will be defending the platform in the comments, we know that Microsoft, Apple, and Google have all copied ideas from each other, such as Apple's ‘Notification Center' on iOS being a closely modified rip from Android. But this, this is not even trying.

This doesn't make any sense. So are you saying Apple made it different with the notification?

UndergroundWire said,

This doesn't make any sense. So are you saying Apple made it different with the notification?

It makes perfect sense. He is saying that the Notification Center was clearly a case of Apple copying from Android. He then adds that "this," the current Chrome OS pictures, represents Google's lack of effort.

pickypg said,
It makes perfect sense. He is saying that the Notification Center was clearly a case of Apple copying from Android. He then adds that "this," the current Chrome OS pictures, represents Google's lack of effort.

And what I am saying is Apple didn't even try to make it different. Yet this child* doesn't state that.

*basing it on the so-called article and drawing conclusions.

UndergroundWire said,

This doesn't make any sense. So are you saying Apple made it different with the notification?

Wow, two companies and a reviewer fighting over a technology NEITHER company had anything to do with...

The article author should go look up the lineage of the notification area.

The Notification Area starts in the 80s with a few products, but some references giving Xerox and some giving the Arthur operating system credit. (Some sources will even point to Windows 1.0 that had a notification area.)

The 'modern' notification area is credited to Windows 95 and the Cairo project that was added to the Chicago project and set the standard for what the world uses for a modern 'notification' area with context relevant icons, information, and access.

So when Apple and Google argue about who ripped who off, they forget they both ripped off projects like the Arthur OS, Xerox, and even Windows 95.

thenetavenger said,

Wow, two companies and a reviewer fighting over a technology NEITHER company had anything to do with...

The article author should go look up the lineage of the notification area.

The Notification Area starts in the 80s with a few products, but some references giving Xerox and some giving the Arthur operating system credit. (Some sources will even point to Windows 1.0 that had a notification area.)

The 'modern' notification area is credited to Windows 95 and the Cairo project that was added to the Chicago project and set the standard for what the world uses for a modern 'notification' area with context relevant icons, information, and access.

So when Apple and Google argue about who ripped who off, they forget they both ripped off projects like the Arthur OS, Xerox, and even Windows 95.

Oh my God why are you so boring? The idea of the notification system as it is evolved today and how it works is in Android. iOS used the same exact thing. Apple Blogs, Microsoft Blogs and Android Blogs all agree on that.

But no you have to come with your boring 'ancestry' type history. I love that Android is doing better than anyone else. I love that Windows Phone is not just because it bothers you. At the end of the day, you're just a sad little boy with nothing but history books and boring lectures that your average consumer can give a crap about.

It looks rather nice. I assume the "taskbar" like on the bottom allows quick app switching? That's one thing I would really like to see on the Windows 8 tablet on ARM. Maybe it's me, but having the bar on the bottom would make switching app so much easier.

Looks like Android to me. The app drawer looks exactly like the one on my Android Phone. The taskbar at the bottom looks like a shifted dock. So seems like an android-for-desktop look to me.

UndergroundWire said,

it's not just the tone, it is just bad writing.

Honestly i have to agree. "While we wait for the trolling in the comments below"... *roll eyes*

Formsim said,

Honestly i have to agree. "While we wait for the trolling in the comments below"... *roll eyes*

To be fair though, there are rather a lot of google fanatics on this website.

Martin5000 said,

To be fair though, there are rather a lot of google fanatics on this website.

To be fair though, there are also a lot of Windows and Apple fanatics on this website as well.

Agreed with the above. Deal with the trolls in a professional manner, don't bait them in your actual articles. Made the whole article (which would normally have been of interest to me) almost unreadable and very amature.

nik louch said,
Wow, the tone of this article is pathetic. It's almost baiting trolls!

It seems someone is trying to emulate Joe Wilcox here.........

Ringer said,
It maybe copying Microsoft and Apple but i do like how it looks

Of course it looks nice. Who doesn't want a desktop that you can customize with a wallpaper? Ahh, oh never mind I forgot about Windows 8 fan club.

UndergroundWire said,

Of course it looks nice. Who doesn't want a desktop that you can customize with a wallpaper? Ahh, oh never mind I forgot about Windows 8 fan club.

Strange I have a wallpaper on my windows 8 desktop ,guess you didn't look long enough before slagging it off ,you might call me a fanboy but we'll put you in the
"i want to stay stuck in the past" catagory

Really, you can put a custom Wallpaper and have the tiles transparent? Awesome!

Think you are confusing Metro with the destktop ,The Metro is a full screen start menu NOT the desktop and you have never been able to put a picture in any windows start menu except the small account picture

MumbleUK said,

Really, you can put a custom Wallpaper and have the tiles transparent? Awesome!

Think you are confusing Metro with the destktop ,The Metro is a full screen start menu NOT the desktop and you have never been able to put a picture in any windows start menu except the small account picture


So I can have a custom wallpaper on my app. After all everyone kept saying that on Windows 8, the desktop is just an APP! What good is that? Please keep trying though. The attempts are funny at best.

Who's next?

UndergroundWire said,

Of course it looks nice. Who doesn't want a desktop that you can customize with a wallpaper? Ahh, oh never mind I forgot about Windows 8 fan club.

Windows 8 desktop can change wallpaper.... but if that is the only thing Chrome OS can do....start changing your wallpapers.

UndergroundWire said,

So I can have a custom wallpaper on my app. After all everyone kept saying that on Windows 8, the desktop is just an APP! What good is that? Please keep trying though. The attempts are funny at best.

Who's next?


I don't see your point at all ,the desktop on my windows 8 works just as well as the desktop on windows 7 looks no different than my windows 7 one just minus the start menu button ,everything i have installed on windows 7 works just as well if not quicker in windows 8 ,ok i get that you don't like the metro side thats a matter of taste but the desktop besides the missing start menu button is the same

UndergroundWire said,

So I can have a custom wallpaper on my app. After all everyone kept saying that on Windows 8, the desktop is just an APP! What good is that? Please keep trying though. The attempts are funny at best.

No, Microsoft have said in terms of OS gestures, the desktop can be manipulated like any other app. But it's still the desktop, not just "another app". And the start menu isn't the desktop either.

MumbleUK said,

I don't see your point at all ,the desktop on my windows 8 works just as well as the desktop on windows 7 looks no different than my windows 7 one just minus the start menu button ,everything i have installed on windows 7 works just as well if not quicker in windows 8 ,ok i get that you don't like the metro side thats a matter of taste but the desktop besides the missing start menu button is the same

But it is an App non the less.

~Johnny said,

No, Microsoft have said in terms of OS gestures, the desktop can be manipulated like any other app. But it's still the desktop, not just "another app". And the start menu isn't the desktop either.


It's not a start menu it's a start screen. If it isn't just another App, then disable the Start Screen and put it on the Desktop as a Start Menu.

UndergroundWire said,

But it is an App non the less.


Well then we can say the same for windows 7 then ,it has a show desktop button bottom right of the taskbar which is no different to the show desktop button on Metro, Please keep trying though the attempts are funny at best
who's next?

MumbleUK said,

Well then we can say the same for windows 7 then ,it has a show desktop button bottom right of the taskbar which is no different to the show desktop button on Metro, Please keep trying though the attempts are funny at best
who's next?

Windows 7 Desktop is not an App. That's the difference. But I love your commitment.

UndergroundWire said,

Of course it looks nice. Who doesn't want a desktop that you can customize with a wallpaper? Ahh, oh never mind I forgot about Windows 8 fan club.

Good attempt at trolling, but I can still use a desktop wallpaper on the desktop. If you're still bitching about the Start Screen, then I feel sorry for you.

Dot Matrix said,

Good attempt at trolling, but I can still use a desktop wallpaper on the desktop. If you're still bitching about the Start Screen, then I feel sorry for you.

Not bitching, since I won't be buying it. I feel sorry for Microsoft mostly. They can never sell two good OS in a row. Sad.

UndergroundWire said,

It's not a start menu it's a start screen. If it isn't just another App, then disable the Start Screen and put it on the Desktop as a Start Menu.

It's a menu that starts apps. So a start menu? And considering it is available from the desktop, your point is moot.

UndergroundWire said,

Windows 7 Desktop is not an App. That's the difference. But I love your commitment.

Even the windows 8 desktop is not an app. It just feels like one. Open some windows on the desktop and close it and reopen, it will be as you left.

UndergroundWire said,

Not bitching, since I won't be buying it. I feel sorry for Microsoft mostly. They can never sell two good OS in a row. Sad.

Then good, leave the Windows 8 discussions to the grown-ups please.

UndergroundWire said,
...

It presents a list of choices and offerings - that is what a menu does. Yes, it's a whole screen. Yes, Microsoft refer to it as the start screen. And yes, it's still a menu. Just because it's full screen does not magically stop it from being a menu.

Dot Matrix said,

Then good, leave the Windows 8 discussions to the grown-ups please.

I have and they themselves called Windows Desktop an App. Now all of a sudden I am using that against them and it doesn't sit well with you. Boo-hoo.

UndergroundWire said,

I have and they themselves called Windows Desktop an App. Now all of a sudden I am using that against them and it doesn't sit well with you. Boo-hoo.

The desktop has *always* been an app. "Explorer.exe" Perhaps you've heard of it.

UndergroundWire said,

Perhaps, but if you kill explorer.exe you see nothing but a wallpaper. So you got nothing to work with. Explorer.exe is critical to Windows. I haven't tried it on Windows 8, does the same thing happen there too?

Yes, Explorer.exe is still integral to the Windows 8 desktop.

UndergroundWire said,

But it is an App non the less.

This is so hilarious to me. The Explorer UI has always been an app. Explroer.exe. As are all GUIs at the presentation level.

We are seeing a change in Google's strategy. They are moving away from the browser, and trying to market it as a "full-fledge" operating system.
This may be due to their most rampant criticism. That ChromeOS is just a browser!

Dot Matrix said,

Yes, Explorer.exe is still integral to the Windows 8 desktop.

Indeed it is, just tested that. So Microsoft can disable the Start Screen and "enable a Windows 7 Mode" kinda like when Windows XP was introduced and they had the Classic Mode and the Start Menu was different. So hypothetically speaking, it is absolutely dumb of Microsoft not to include that on RTM? I mean, do we need the Start Screen on a desktop environment? Absolutely not. Do we need the Start Screen on a tablet? Absolutely.

So if everything is bundled into one application, then why not give the user the ability to disable the Start Screen? They have done it before, don't be stupid and not do it again. Right? I see no argument against this.

FMH said,
We are seeing a change in Google's strategy. They are moving away from the browser, and trying to market it as a "full-fledge" operating system.
This may be due to their most rampant criticism. That ChromeOS is just a browser!

It always has been. Which is why at that price point it doesn't sell. I am not spending $200 for a browser when I can get a tablet or a laptop for $100 more. Like I stated in a the beginning, there is no reason for Google to diverge into Android and Chrome OS. The product development was better off for a hardware to connect your Android phone bringing Android to the Desktop. Similar to what Ubuntu is doing and Motorola. The Google can also focus on making the Chrome Browser the default browser for Android. You see the two would join and there wouldn't be a need for Chrome OS.

Don't get me wrong, if Chrome OS was priced at a $100, I would get it for my parents, but I don't think you'll ever see that for a new product.

UndergroundWire said,

It always has been. Which is why at that price point it doesn't sell. I am not spending $200 for a browser when I can get a tablet or a laptop for $100 more. Like I stated in a the beginning, there is no reason for Google to diverge into Android and Chrome OS. The product development was better off for a hardware to connect your Android phone bringing Android to the Desktop. Similar to what Ubuntu is doing and Motorola. The Google can also focus on making the Chrome Browser the default browser for Android. You see the two would join and there wouldn't be a need for Chrome OS.

Don't get me wrong, if Chrome OS was priced at a $100, I would get it for my parents, but I don't think you'll ever see that for a new product.

I agree, but my point is about the interface. It is without a doubt, still a browser, but with the "full desktop" interface, most people would be fooled into thinking that their is more to it.

It was easy to throw the "browser only" excuse just by looking at that that browser interface. Now you can't do that. It actually looks like a full OS.
It is the same Chrome browser with a new design layout.

FMH said,

I agree, but my point is about the interface. It is without a doubt, still a browser, but with the "full desktop" interface, most people would be fooled into thinking that their is more to it.

It was easy to throw the "browser only" excuse just by looking at that that browser interface. Now you can't do that. It actually looks like a full OS.
It is the same Chrome browser with a new design layout.

Pretty much. I'll just wait when they eventually bring Android to the desktop.

UndergroundWire said,

Windows 7 Desktop is not an App. That's the difference. But I love your commitment.

Um, it technically is and has been even going back to Win 3.1 and Win95 days.

Explorer.exe and Progman.exe have always been the Shell Apps that can and are sometimes replaced with custom 'Apps' for the UI 'desktop'.

When they are replaced, the Desktop no longer exists. With Windows 7 this visual functionality extends to the DWM as well, which can be changed too.

You do realize that a MAJORITY of ATMs and Kiosk devices used around the world are Windows devices, that HAVE NO DESKTOP, and are just custom Apps that replace the desktop and shell? I mean you really can't be this out of touch, right?


You have NO IDEA what you are talking about, and maybe this is where you should just become quiet out of shame.

thenetavenger said,

Um, it technically is and has been even going back to Win 3.1 and Win95 days.

Explorer.exe and Progman.exe have always been the Shell Apps that can and are sometimes replaced with custom 'Apps' for the UI 'desktop'.

When they are replaced, the Desktop no longer exists. With Windows 7 this visual functionality extends to the DWM as well, which can be changed too.

You do realize that a MAJORITY of ATMs and Kiosk devices used around the world are Windows devices, that HAVE NO DESKTOP, and are just custom Apps that replace the desktop and shell? I mean you really can't be this out of touch, right?


You have NO IDEA what you are talking about, and maybe this is where you should just become quiet out of shame.

Um, you are late to the party and should be quiet. We are past all that. Did you fail to read that, again?

are you done with your tantrum yet?

UndergroundWire said,

Um, you are late to the party and should be quiet. We are past all that. Did you fail to read that, again?

Just give up on Chrome OS and focus on Android with Chrome Browser. Personally I believe Chrome OS should have been what Motorola has been doing. Bringing your Android phone to the desktop.

UndergroundWire said,
Just give up on Chrome OS and focus on Android with Chrome Browser. Personally I believe Chrome OS should have been what Motorola has been doing. Bringing your Android phone to the desktop.

But saying that, Android itself is fundamentally an old system. Android originally was designed to go head to head with Blackberry and WinMo and later on Google will either need to do a drastic re-write of Android like how Microsoft went from WinMo to Windows Phone or use a completely different system i.e. Chrome OS.

UndergroundWire said,
Just give up on Chrome OS and focus on Android with Chrome Browser. Personally I believe Chrome OS should have been what Motorola has been doing. Bringing your Android phone to the desktop.

Agreed, I love Chrome on my Galaxy Nexus.

Tony. said,

But saying that, Android itself is fundamentally an old system. Android originally was designed to go head to head with Blackberry and WinMo and later on Google will either need to do a drastic re-write of Android like how Microsoft went from WinMo to Windows Phone or use a completely different system i.e. Chrome OS.

They already did, it's called Android 4.0 or Ice Cream Sandwich!!!

Tony. said,

But saying that, Android itself is fundamentally an old system. Android originally was designed to go head to head with Blackberry and WinMo and later on Google will either need to do a drastic re-write of Android like how Microsoft went from WinMo to Windows Phone or use a completely different system i.e. Chrome OS.

Correction: Android was developed to go head to head with Blackberry and Windows Mobile, it was later redeveloped by Google to compete with iOS.

Android is working (market share proves that). The UI has been changed in ICS. Now if they can bring it to the desktop level and get rid of the Android Browser and make Chrome browser the default then it would be great.

Tony. said,

But saying that, Android itself is fundamentally an old system. Android originally was designed to go head to head with Blackberry and WinMo and later on Google will either need to do a drastic re-write of Android like how Microsoft went from WinMo to Windows Phone or use a completely different system i.e. Chrome OS.


They did, that's what Android 4 is. Android 2.x was the peak of what they could do with that old system but they needed to add things like multi-processor support, different screen rez's (for tablets, TV's, etc.), hardware acceleration, etc. Android 3 was a nasty hack to get something out for tablets specifically while they finished the real product which became Android 4... that's why they never released the source for Android 3. Android 4 is a solid foundation to build on and they didn't have to throw out existing user like MS did when they went from 6.x to 7.

Asmodai said,

They did, that's what Android 4 is. Android 2.x was the peak of what they could do with that old system but they needed to add things like multi-processor support, different screen rez's (for tablets, TV's, etc.), hardware acceleration, etc. Android 3 was a nasty hack to get something out for tablets specifically while they finished the real product which became Android 4... that's why they never released the source for Android 3. Android 4 is a solid foundation to build on and they didn't have to throw out existing user like MS did when they went from 6.x to 7.

windows 7 is 6.1 and windows 8 is 6.2, theres no NT7 as that seems what your refering too.
besides, windows never had a 'major' UI change as is, the classic mode is still available in Win7 to make it look almost identical to win9x/XP.
Also as sortoff a side note, MS had a tablet OS back in the 90s.

Shadowzz said,

windows 7 is 6.1 and windows 8 is 6.2, theres no NT7 as that seems what your refering too.
besides, windows never had a 'major' UI change as is, the classic mode is still available in Win7 to make it look almost identical to win9x/XP.
Also as sortoff a side note, MS had a tablet OS back in the 90s.

Asmodai is not talking about Windows OS but windows mobile(6.x) to Windows Phone 7(7.0). You need to read before commenting :-)

Tony. said,

But saying that, Android itself is fundamentally an old system. Android originally was designed to go head to head with Blackberry and WinMo and later on Google will either need to do a drastic re-write of Android like how Microsoft went from WinMo to Windows Phone or use a completely different system i.e. Chrome OS.

The technology aspects of Android are also very very old and dated. Starting with a partially used monolithic kernel (Which bypasses many of the newer features of Linux that get around the monolithic issues.)

Then you add in a JVM technology from literally the 90s that was outdated when Google bought it, and never was designed to offer the functionality, extensibility or performance of a mainstream OS. (Microsoft JIT MSJVM technologies from the 1990s did a better job at runtime performance than Dalvik does, and yet Dalvik is the entire application platform for a mobile OS.)

If you technically look at Android as an OS engineer, and the combined effect the technologies, Windows 3.1 was a far more advanced OS model 20 years ago.
(Want to personally challenge this, Windows 3.1 had swap/page features, the OS was not allowed to terminate applications without user consent, and its 'monolithic' kernel design was faster and more flexible for drivers and offered structured common API sets for newer technologies at the time that Android still doesn't support, like a common sound engine, printing engine, etc.)


The idea that ChromeOS or Android are taken seriously shows a massive decline in technology level of understanding in the computer sciences. Kiddies that went from OS/2 to Linux in their 'labs' think Linux and ChromeOS and Android are 'freaking' awesome seem to have missed the technologies that changed the computing industry and continue to advance it.

Shadowzz said,

windows 7 is 6.1 and windows 8 is 6.2, theres no NT7 as that seems what your refering too.
besides, windows never had a 'major' UI change as is, the classic mode is still available in Win7 to make it look almost identical to win9x/XP.
Also as sortoff a side note, MS had a tablet OS back in the 90s.

He's talking about Windows Mobile 6.x and Windows Phone 7, you ****ing idiot.

Panda X said,

Microsoft didn't invent glass nor were they the first to have a glassy UI. Microsoft also didn't invent 32x32 icons.

Never seen a glass UI rendered in realtime with reflections and blur In an OS before windows longhorn in 2003.

And it's not the first time that someone copies Microsoft's UI. Sun Looking Glass and apple exposé on OSX both photocopied features from Microsoft task gallery demoed 12 years ago

http://research.microsoft.com/...pages/window_operations.htm

ObiWanToby said,
Does look like Windows 7?

looks more like a better version of Windows Metro. which is going to hit the ground like a bowling ball in the fall. Horrid OS. Makes even Ubuntu's latest versions look good. Windows 8 is simply a tablet OS. Can't say it's a serious desktop OS even if I tried. Rather go to Apple..

PatrynXX said,

looks more like a better version of Windows Metro. which is going to hit the ground like a bowling ball in the fall. Horrid OS. Makes even Ubuntu's latest versions look good. Windows 8 is simply a tablet OS. Can't say it's a serious desktop OS even if I tried. Rather go to Apple..

Please - if you rather cavalierly dismiss Windows 8 as a tablet OS, you've only run it in a VM, if that.

I dual-booted the DP and 7; however, when it comes to the Consumer Preview, I've fired Windows 7 altogether.

The backward compatibility is That Good.

Remember that? Backward compatibility? That has been an issue that has plagued Microsoft with previous beta versions of Windows - even Windows 7. I've taken every single application that I would normally have run in 7 (except those made moot by features in the CP) and migrated it. Same with all my games. You're so hung up on there not being the Start menu that you cling to like a crutch that you have forgotten already the issues that Windows 7 beta 1 - even Windows 7 RC - had with backward compatibility. Now, don't get me wrong; Windows 7 was great. However, when it comes to hardware and software compatibility (with existing hardware and software) Windows 8 beats Windows 7. Like a big bass drum.

Panda X said,

Microsoft didn't invent glass nor were they the first to have a glassy UI. Microsoft also didn't invent 32x32 icons.

They didn't invent any of those things, and nor was the comment you were replying to say that. In fact, the original story (if you even read it) said the icons splayed on the desktop looked like the latest release of OSX, not Windows 7.

PGHammer said,

Please - if you rather cavalierly dismiss Windows 8 as a tablet OS, you've only run it in a VM, if that.

Personally, I admire Microsoft's commitment to backward compatibility. However, I've been running a version of Windows 8 as my primary desktop OS since the Developer Preview came out last year. My opinion, as a computer enthusiast and a professional developer, is that Windows 8 sucks.

Metro apps cannot be closed. The OS will run up to 12 of them simultaneously, and when the 13th app is launched it puts the least-frequently used app into a deep hibernate. Why is this a problem? Well, when an app bugs out (like many do in the Consumer Preview) the only solution is a system reboot or manually killing the task from the "ghetto" desktop.

You can have most 2 metro apps on-screen and active at any one time.

The mouse "hot spots" for bringing up things like the charms bar are designed only for a single monitor. If you have a dual or triple-monitor setup, good luck getting the corner gestures to work.

Developers are being "strongly encouraged" to drop support for the classic desktop and move everything to WinRT and the Metro interface. Part of the WGA testing we have to go through to get an app logo from Microsoft is how well new apps work on tablets with a touch-based interface.

I could go on and on and on and on. I've been working closely with Microsoft for almost a year on Windows 8 development, and I can assure you it is specifically directed to the consumer market with a focus on touch-based interfaces. There is a belief within Microsoft that the MSDN team and Windows team are at-odds with each other, and it's certainly showing.

I don't know everything, of course, so I could be wrong and things will take a different direction before release. But as they stand now, I have to agree that Microsoft is focusing on tablets, SFF PC's, and phones for Windows 8.

I should mention that the Consumer Preview does have an option to close apps by going to the top of the screen, bringing up the charms bar, right-clicking on one of the running app icons, and choosing "close". However, this feature may not be part of the final release. It was only added because of all of the problems people had with bugged apps in the Developer Preview.