windows 8 Microsoft Drops Aero from Windows 8

[Zain Adeel]

it will look a little different when windows 8 RTMs.

You can see how most pro apps don't use glass. They have their own UI. Now they can actually simplify it to make it more attractive and consistent with the rest of the system.

I am already seeing some apps go the Zune UI way.

[Brandon H Supervisor]

I'm still seeing folks going on and on about the tutorial coming in Windows 8. Apparently, they've forgotten about this guy:

and don't forget the tutorial/interactive video thing that XP had

[BajiRav]

It was pretty much exactly like that (using the available tech at the time of course). However it did force developers to immediately start developing for OS X rather than letting "Classic" linger for ages, something I'm afraid will happen with the desktop on Windows. OS X Cheetah was released in 2001, the same year Microsoft made an Office version for it available.

I was using safari in full screen today and had to switch back-forth once (felt exactly same as switching between metro apps/desktop on Win8) and that got me thinking that the Classic or Legacy windows apps are not going anywhere. Microsoft will just make them run full screen in Windows 8+ (either a service pack or in 9 etc.) without additional features that WinRT apps enjoy.

It's amazing how much similar the full screen mode on OS X Lion feels like Windows 8.

[.Neo]

I was using safari in full screen today and had to switch back-forth once (felt exactly same as switching between metro apps/desktop on Win8) and that got me thinking that the Classic or Legacy windows apps are not going anywhere. Microsoft will just make them run full screen in Windows 8+ (either a service pack or in 9 etc.) without additional features that WinRT apps enjoy.

It's amazing how much similar the full screen mode on OS X Lion feels like Windows 8.

Difference is you're not confronted with apps that have a radically different interface and window behavior. I'm also not being forced to use full-screen with a certain set of apps.

Personally I hardly ever use full-screen on OS X Lion simply because it serves no real purpose on a 27-inch screen. QuickTime X and VLC being the obvious exceptions of course. ;)

[BajiRav]

and don't forget the tutorial/interactive video thing that XP had

hated it from the bottom of my heart every time I had to install XP or create a new user on a box WHERE I HAD ALREADY DISMISSED THE DAMN TUTORIAL! :angry: :laugh: That stupid thing wouldn't go away unless I opened and closed it once!

(Somebody will no come by and point out an easier way to dismiss it after all these years!)

[BajiRav]

Difference is you're not confronted with apps that have a radically different interface and window behavior.

true. It does share at least one aspect though - hiding UI controls :p (like exiting out of full screen button in the menu bar).

[Ice_Blue]

I agree with this. Literally, all of the older generation and people who aren't really technophobes who I've shown Windows 8 too - as soon I've showed it too them and told them that's the new Windows, they've literally said "okay" and got on with it. They don't care and they've not questioned it, and they've all seemed fine. As long as their stuff works, boom. :p

Same here. Out of the eight :D people I have shown it to and let them use it, none, not one, has complained about any of the things that I see people here griping about all the time.

Not one of them said "what happened to the start thingy?"

or "why does it take x clicks to do y".

They sat down, looked at the screen, clicked on their desired tile, and got going.

Geeks see their control of the dark arts slipping away from them, and go into hissy fits over things the average user doesn't give two figs about.

[.Neo]

true. It does share at least one aspect though - hiding UI controls :p (like exiting out of full screen button in the menu bar).

Yeah of course, they wouldn't make much sense when a window is full-screen. You do on the other hand still have access to the same universal Menu Bar, Dock and Mission Control. It's not like they're used for windowed apps only. My point is there isn't a split-up between full-screen apps and windowed ones and you're not forced to use something full-screen only. It's still all and the same Aqua interface. :)

[MorganX]

I get it, but I'm not digging it. I've always been fond of the glass look. Switching to this is probably going to make me wonder what's wrong with my video driver for the first few days, since it looks like Aero Lite.

Got a chuckle out of that one, nice.

[Noir Angel]

Seems that MS is just guessing at what to do, and it's kind a late in the dev cycle for that if you ask me. However, removing Aero makes sense in one area ... VDI. The GPU resources for Aero (RemoteFX) add up. Simply removing it and settling on a somewhat bland simple to render Gem OS-like color scheme removes this resource requirement. To be honest, it is needed in that environment as we won't be stacking Quadro GPUs at a minimum of $400 pop for 5-10 desktops each card. It's much easier to tell users the Aero themes are no longer in Windows as it is to tell them you can's have that nice transparency, etc. because we're not gonna buy the resources to do it. All users will do is demand a desktop which we don't want anymore. We're moving to VDI and Windows 7 seven ASAP. Windows 8 will be a support and end user nightmare and its going to be a helluva lot easier to deal with in a Virtual Desktop World.

If that's their justification it's a pretty pathetic one. With Windows 7 they have already designed it so that it disables Aero whenever resources are needed elsewhere, or when an application runs that isn't compatible with it. And it's not exactly as if Aero takes up much of a resource footprint, $30 bargain bin graphics cards are capable of running it these days with few issues so it just strikes me as being a very questionable design choice, especially given that with the introduction of Vista, Aero was one of the most popular features.

[Anthonyd]

If that's their justification it's a pretty pathetic one. With Windows 7 they have already designed it so that it disables Aero whenever resources are needed elsewhere, or when an application runs that isn't compatible with it. And it's not exactly as if Aero takes up much of a resource footprint, $30 bargain bin graphics cards are capable of running it these days with few issues so it just strikes me as being a very questionable design choice, especially given that with the introduction of Vista, Aero was one of the most popular features.

Don't trust a randumb advice on the internet who makes such assumption based on a screenshot.

So far, MS didn't announce that they are giving up on GPU/2D acceleration to draw component on the Desktop. The funny part about that is that all Metro apps are GPU accelerated;hence the "fast & fluid" experience.

Because the glass effect is being replaced by a solid color doesn't makes it using less resources than before.

I invite you to test it by yourself or to wait for reviews that compare GPU usage on Windows 7 and Windows 8. For now you can download any software that shows GPU usage (ex: process explorer) and see how low Aero uses your GPU. My current GPU usage is around 1% as I'm writing this post. Will Windows 8 uses 0%? I highly doubt it. Also it won't be using my CPU because that would makes it really heavy on the CPU usage, and it will kill any laptop battery.

[MorganX]

If that's their justification it's a pretty pathetic one. With Windows 7 they have already designed it so that it disables Aero whenever resources are needed elsewhere, or when an application runs that isn't compatible with it. And it's not exactly as if Aero takes up much of a resource footprint, $30 bargain bin graphics cards are capable of running it these days with few issues so it just strikes me as being a very questionable design choice, especially given that with the introduction of Vista, Aero was one of the most popular features.

I'm not going to get into RemoteFX and VDI, but removing aero was not required to alleviate the overhead, simply making classic the default theme would suffice. When you take away desktops, users want the same experience or they will complain and demand that they should be allowed to spend their budgets how they see fit and not accept a lesser remote session.

I think MS' justification is trying to wean everyone away from Windows 7. Remember, Windows 7 is the best desktop OS out there and there's really no good reason to change other than MS' furthering their Phone and Tablet efforts and leveraging their desktop dominance to do so. That's my personal feeling on the matter. Windows 7 isn't going down easy so the more different they can make 8, the more they can give the appearance they are offering so much more. MS Shareholders do not need nor want Windows 7 living as long as XP, and given it's superioirity, it can last twice as long.

There's also a bit of MS has never had much style. Look at Windows icons and the customization market. Look at gadgets, then look at Widgets, Konfabulator, and X-widgets. Aero is the most stylish thing MS ever did, lol.

[George P Global Moderator]

Looking at the metro frameworks we have, it'd be voodoo for them to get a decent performing version of Office running in Metro, and I really can't seem them ever porting over the full applications - not with the current frameworks anyway. Maybe smaller, bite sized, metro-optimised versions, but not the full prowess of the suite. And to be fair, the full programs aren't suited for Metro anyway with the amount of options they have at their disposal.

Going with what we have now then yes, but I doubt the APIs will stay at the level they are now. I fully believe WinRT is the next step and Win32 will slowly work it's way off of the OS over time. I don't see why the apps wouldn't work in metro, we're just talking full screen versions of them. They all have the ribbon and that covers what you need really. I'm sure it's doable, UI wise there really isn't anything to hold them back, it's just like you said the frameworks aren't there yet. This is also why right now they haven't allowed metro apps to even run on the desktop but I expect that to change at some point.

[Kyang]

The blog only states that rendering realistic glass with all the required effects necessary to sustain that illusion looks, "Dated and Cheesy". This I could agree with. I don't, but I could. The glass effects in Vista and Win7 are not very realistic anyway.

I think a translucent window frame achieves the design goal of reducing the visual weight of the chrome better than solid white borders. A clear frame simply is not there. A white frame is there no matter how pristine the white is.

[Kyang]

Sorry for the double post:

Going with what we have now then yes, but I doubt the APIs will stay at the level they are now. I fully believe WinRT is the next step and Win32 will slowly work it's way off of the OS over time. I don't see why the apps wouldn't work in metro, we're just talking full screen versions of them. They all have the ribbon and that covers what you need really. I'm sure it's doable, UI wise there really isn't anything to hold them back, it's just like you said the frameworks aren't there yet. This is also why right now they haven't allowed metro apps to even run on the desktop but I expect that to change at some point.

What about comparing multiple documents side by side? Snapping allows two different applications to be used simultaneously. However, a user writing a report can easily have several documents open at once, along with a few web pages for reference. Expecting the user to swipe to the right to switch between all of these windows is extremely cumbersome and a bit slow.

Yes, currently the traditional desktop is there to support the existing Office and this usage case but that only supports accusations that Metro is unsuited for getting any "real" work done.

[Anthonyd]

Sorry for the double post:

What about comparing multiple documents side by side? Snapping allows two different applications to be used simultaneously. However, a user writing a report can easily have several documents open at once, along with a few web pages for reference. Expecting the user to swipe to the right to switch between all of these windows is extremely cumbersome and a bit slow.

Yes, currently the traditional desktop is there to support the existing Office and this usage case but that only supports accusations that Metro is unsuited for getting any "real" work done.

If you read carefully the long blog post, you'll see that Metro isn't made to replace the Desktop. Both are going to live side by side for a very long time.

[Kyang]

If you read carefully the long blog post, you'll see that Metro isn't made to replace the Desktop. Both are going to live side by side for a very long time.

That doesn't address my point. Office does not work well in Metro, how can this be fixed?

[Anthonyd]

That doesn't address my point. Office does not work well in Metro, how can this be fixed?

About which version of Office are you talking about?

[Kyang]

Any recent version.

Specifying a version would not alter the scope of my question.

[Noir Angel]

Don't trust a randumb advice on the internet who makes such assumption based on a screenshot.

So far, MS didn't announce that they are giving up on GPU/2D acceleration to draw component on the Desktop. The funny part about that is that all Metro apps are GPU accelerated;hence the "fast & fluid" experience.

Because the glass effect is being replaced by a solid color doesn't makes it using less resources than before.

I invite you to test it by yourself or to wait for reviews that compare GPU usage on Windows 7 and Windows 8. For now you can download any software that shows GPU usage (ex: process explorer) and see how low Aero uses your GPU. My current GPU usage is around 1% as I'm writing this post. Will Windows 8 uses 0%? I highly doubt it. Also it won't be using my CPU because that would makes it really heavy on the CPU usage, and it will kill any laptop battery.

Yes, that was precisely my point. The footprint is so low there's simply no justification I can see for removing it. Having the UI GPU accelerated is great but I personally think this new design just looks horrible. I liked Aero because it was a break from the traditional dull gradients that were traditional for so many years. I just feel as if Microsoft have taken a big step backwards here.

[Dot Matrix]

If you read carefully the long blog post, you'll see that Metro isn't made to replace the Desktop. Both are going to live side by side for a very long time.

That doesn't address my point. Office does not work well in Metro, how can this be fixed?

Yes, it does. Since Office isn't a Metro app, there isn't anything that needs fixed at the moment.

[neo158]

I really hope you realize you're completely talking out of your ass. Apple had to support legacy apps all the same back in May 2001 when they first released OS X. Why exactly do you think they incorporated "Classic" into the OS and continued to support it until OS X Leopard (2007)? The main difference is that Apple released their important new apps for OS X from the get-go instead of letting then run only within the old Classic environment. Microsoft on the other hand is actively sustaining the desktop for the years to come by not releasing something like Office 15 for Metro, which in my opinion is a huge mistake. If a suite like Office is truly better off running within the desktop environment - as some have brought up in defense - you know there's something fundamentally wrong with Metro.

My original point however is you can't really speak of a "uniform" situation when you're dealing with two completely different interfaces that each run their own separate set of apps within the same OS, which isn't just there for legacy purposes.

The point is that unlike classic, the desktop in Windows 8 is just an app and not an entire OS like classic was, that, as you said, was dropped in Leopard. That shows that Apple don't need to maintain backwards compatibility for the userbase it has.

Microsoft however, need to maintain backwards compatibility for the sake of applications that have no Metro version e.g. Office 2010 or lower or even custom applications that are used by businesses, there's no Metro version available and I don't think businesses will spend the money rewriting any custom applications they use, this means that the "two interfaces" have to co-exist. Office could run quite happily in a Metro environment but it would have to use WinRT APIs, which older versions of Office don't use.

[Kyang]

Yes, it does. Since Office isn't a Metro app, there isn't anything that needs fixed at the moment.

No it doesn't, because I'm not talking about "at the moment".

[MorganX]

Yes, that was precisely my point. The footprint is so low there's simply no justification I can see for removing it.

Actually delivering the full Aero experience to 100s, 1000s of remote clients is not low. I'm not saying that's why they did it, I'm saying that's one positive. Though I am sure this would be on anyone's top 5 reasons to drop Aero.

I love Aero and think what's in the screenshot is fugly. Would prefer it stayed. But no Aero will save a ton of money and resources and gig to the desktop may not be as necessary as it is now for large VDI environments.

VDI and App-V's time has come.

[jmc15john]

I really enjoyed the glass effect. Oh, well, I guess that's why they have 3rd party apps.