Will You Replace Programs for Apps When Updating to Windows 10?


Apps for Programs  

125 members have voted

  1. 1. Will You Replace Programs for Apps After Windows 10 Launch?

    • Yes - Most/All
      11
    • No - None
      67
    • The Majority
      10
    • A Nominal Few
      37


Recommended Posts

I guess my main question would be why? What benefits would it bring? Would the upgrade to the new app be free?

 

I figure leave well enough alone. I'm perfectly happy with my desktop applications.

I'll use which ever program is better. You want me to use your app? Don't f**k it up.

 

This X100

 

But then I don't have an irrational hatred for Win 8 and metro like some so called geeks, so there's that 

I see alot of people commenting 'no' when they read my previous post as to why Metro apps currently are terrible but no one has commented why they think they are better than desktop apps.

Take Photoshop. Imagine it as a metro app. 
Now tell me why I should use that over the desktop version, prove your points to me.

 

So when Windows 10 is forced on poor Windows 7 users, first thing to do is use PowerShell to uninstall all apps, change all defaults to desktop versions. And replace all Windows "improvements" with 3rd party desktop apps so functionality doesn't reduce every few years and UI isn't compromised every few years. :p

 

 

Or just go back to XP.

I see alot of people commenting 'no' when they read my previous post as to why Metro apps currently are terrible but no one has commented why they think they are better than desktop apps.

Take Photoshop. Imagine it as a metro app. 

Now tell me why I should use that over the desktop version, prove your points to me.

 

I doubt you'll get a response.  As I believe you've said, Modern UI applications cannot replace programs like Photoshop (or even Microsoft Word for that matter) without dumbing down/removing features.  The Modern UI Word is just a bit more feature rich than WordPad. I couldn't even imagine simple tools like Handbrake in Modern UI. 

 

Desktop programs are superior in every way (desktop/notebook) to their Modern UI "equivalents".

 

I've yet to see what some of the lovefest is with these applications, though I guess I would like them on my phone or other smaller device.  /shrug

 

 So the answer to this thread is... nope and no way.  I do not own either a Windows Phone or a Tablet so applications across devices do not matter to me.  Lack of features and the overall look and feel of Modern UI applications is unappealing.

  • Like 2

That would just prove my point. 
Desktop apps are better in every way, but after my original comment Ive read 3 or 4 people simply say 'no' to everything that was said, but not one of them gave any points why.
I do agree, security is better for Metro apps (virus free etc) but apart from that, theres nothing going for them on the desktop. On tablets and Windows Phones, sure, they are great and thats where they belong, but currently, on the desktop, they dont. 

I see alot of people commenting 'no' when they read my previous post as to why Metro apps currently are terrible but no one has commented why they think they are better than desktop apps.

Take Photoshop. Imagine it as a metro app. 

Now tell me why I should use that over the desktop version, prove your points to me.

While well coded applications are fine either way IMO, there are too many desktop applications that still draw using GDI, dx9 or something equally crap.

 

Every desktop app has its own separate update mechanism.

 

And since win32 apps can interfere with eachother and install drivers and services and whatnot, they are inherently problematic and can be less secure and make your entire system less secure.

 

When you uninstall a win32 app, who knows what junk it's leaving behind.

 

If Photoshop was a Windows Runtime app, I'd never need it to check for updates, no other software could make it crash, etc.  But functionally I'm guessing it's a better coded app than most.

 

___

As for me, I've already stopped using win32 apps where I can.  Once Spartan is finished I'll add browsers to that list...games will be pretty much the last software standing in win32 on my box.

Or just go back to XP.

Sure, are you willing to provide me XP compatible drivers?  :rolleyes: Oh wait not possible. How convenient to tell people to do what's not possible with current hardware. It's like saying: You don't like earth? Then go and stay on Jupiter. Nobody's stopping you  :p

I doubt you'll get a response.  As I believe you've said, Modern UI applications cannot replace programs like Photoshop (or even Microsoft Word for that matter) without dumbing down/removing features.  The Modern UI Word is just a bit more feature rich than WordPad. I couldn't even imagine simple tools like Handbrake in Modern UI. 

 

 

Oh really, I'll give you something far more advanced than handbrake then

 

http://apps.microsoft.com/windows/en-us/app/96a3b0bf-5a00-4e1a-b073-b04d295e58bd

 

no need to imagine. The capability is there, they just need to make use of it. Not all apps need to be modern apps, FOR NOW photoshop and 3DS MAX and similar fall in that category, that doesn't mean they couldn't recreate either one as a modern app. with full functionality. 

That would just prove my point. 

Desktop apps are better in every way, but after my original comment Ive read 3 or 4 people simply say 'no' to everything that was said, but not one of them gave any points why.

I do agree, security is better for Metro apps (virus free etc) but apart from that, theres nothing going for them on the desktop. On tablets and Windows Phones, sure, they are great and thats where they belong, but currently, on the desktop, they dont. 

 

Kind of like you didn't give any points as to you BS argument that desktop apps are better in every way ?

 

of course some apps don't exist as a desktop app, like netflix. and making one would be a waste of resources when they have a modern version. 

 

There's also the whole built in sync for modern apps. everything syncs between my machines directly without a need for me to set up special crap for each app, if they have any. Also for a lot of apps, the ability to show information on the livetile is a great benefit that you don't get with desktop apps. 

Oh really, I'll give you something far more advanced than handbrake then

 

http://apps.microsoft.com/windows/en-us/app/96a3b0bf-5a00-4e1a-b073-b04d295e58bd

 

no need to imagine. The capability is there, they just need to make use of it. Not all apps need to be modern apps, FOR NOW photoshop and 3DS MAX and similar fall in that category, that doesn't mean they couldn't recreate either one as a modern app. with full functionality. 

 

Comparing HandBrake to a video editor isn't really fair...since both have different purposes, different features and different functions.  It's like comparing PowerPoint to Excel.

 

Even so, show me how this mobile PowerDirector matches feature to feature with its desktop brother (hint: it doesn't).  That is why your example comes free as a companion tool for its desktop "equivalent", PowerDirector 13....or is a simple video editor overall (a little more powerful than MovieMaker).

 

Try again.

 

Yea, try to pack the below interface/features into the woefully inefficient ModernUI design.  You'd have to cut features to make it fit.

post-21852-0-06309700-1428578338.jpg

For me, apps are quite basic and I really like customising my stuff. I don't mind the look of apps, I actually think they look better than the big desktop version it's just they don't offer as much. Will switch for the simple stuff.

Comparing HandBrake to a video editor isn't really fair...since both have different purposes, different features and different functions.  It's like comparing PowerPoint to Excel.

 

Even so, show me how this mobile PowerDirector matches feature to feature with its desktop brother (hint: it doesn't).  That is why your example comes free as a companion tool for its desktop "equivalent", PowerDirector 13....or is a simple video editor overall (a little more powerful than MovieMaker).

 

Try again.

 

Yea, try to pack the below interface/features into the woefully inefficient ModernUI design.  You'd have to cut features to make it fit.

 

I'm struggling here... there is a different between can and will.

 

My opinion, is that modern applications can and will become as functional (if not more) than today's 'desktop programs'.

What I read from your statement is that you think they can't and therefore won't become as functional as today's 'desktop programs'.

 

I just don't understand the rationale behind the 'can't'.  Do you care to share?

I am sorry if I am asking you to rehash statements that you've already made, but I wouldn't be asking if I wasn't genuinely interested

Yea, try to pack the below interface/features into the woefully inefficient ModernUI design.  You'd have to cut features to make it fit.

 

windows 10 has something called adaptive ux. what this means is, the app can load a UI based on the device capabilities. therefore, if a desktop type device is detected with no touchscreen, the app can load the exact same UI layout as in the image you provided. The exact same app can then provide a touch friendly UI if its run from a tablet.

Microsoft has already said they will be providing more controls that work well on different device types. And for other cases where these controls are still insufficient, there is always custom controls.

  • Like 3

You can't have it both ways, so make up your mind.

 

umm that's what I said to start with. what are you on ?

Comparing HandBrake to a video editor isn't really fair...since both have different purposes, different features and different functions.  It's like comparing PowerPoint to Excel.

 

 

Actually, it's more like comparing a calculator to Excel. they both do similar things, but one does a lot more. 

 

 

Yea, try to pack the below interface/features into the woefully inefficient ModernUI design.  You'd have to cut features to make it fit.

 

YEs, you could put that in a modern app if you wanted to, but the thing is modern teaches you to only have the tools you want/need visible at a time. not to have the whole toolbox out and open all the time. it's no efficient or good design no matter what UI design language you choose to use. 

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • AMD RX 9070 GRE AI, Blender benchmarks vs 9070 XT, 7800XT, Nvidia RTX 5070, 4070 by Sayan Sen Earlier this week, we shared the first part of our review of AMD's new RX 9070 GRE. It was about the gaming performance of the GPU, and we gave it an 8 out of 10. As a follow-up, similar to how we did with the 9070 XT and non-XT, we are doing a dedicated productivity review for the RX 9070 GRE as well, where we compare it against the 9070 XT, 9070, 7800 XT, as well as Nvidia's 5070 and 4070. This will include AI, rendering, compute, and more benchmarks. AI performance, especially, is a very important metric in today's world, and AMD also promised big improvements thanks to its underlying architectural improvements. We will be pitching it against the data we already have for the RX 9070, and RX 9070 XT, but also the Nvidia 5070 FE, MSI GeForce RTX 4070 VENTUS 2X 12G, and Gigabyte Radeon RX 7800 XT GAMING OC 16G as they are in a similar price class, but also because we do not have a comparable 5060 Ti card lying around here that we can compare it against. Before we get underway, this is a collaboration between Sayan Sen and Steven Parker, who lent me his test bed. Also, there was no editorial input from AMD. First up, the specs of the RX 9070, 9070 XT, and 9070 GRE, which were given to us by AMD: Radeon RX 9070 GRE Radeon RX 9070 Radeon RX 9070 XT Boost Clock: Game Clock: up to 2.79GHz up to 2.20GHz up to 2.52GHz up to 2.07GHz up to 2.97GHz up to 2.40GHz Stream Processors 3,072 (48 CU) 3,584 (56 CU) 4,096 (64 CU) Ray Accelerator 48 56 64 AI Accelerator 96 112 128 ROPs 96 128 Texture Mapping Units 192 224 256 Memory 12 GB GDDR6, 18Gbps Clock, 192-bit Bus 432 GB/s 16 GB GDDR6, 20Gbps Clock, 256-bit Bus Effective Memory Bandwidth: 640 GB/s Infinity Cache 48 MB (3rd Gen) 64 MB (3rd Gen) Card Bus PCI-E 5.0 X16 Output 2x HDMI 2.1b 2x DisplayPort 2.1a Power consumption 220W 304W Recommended PSU 650W 750W Slot width 2x 3x Price (SEP) $549 $599 As you can see from the specs above, it is less than the standard RX 9070 in every way that counts, except for slightly higher Boost and Game clock speed. Design Moving on, the RX 9070 GRE we were given is an XFX Swift triple-fan, dual-slot design with two 8-pin connectors. At 30cm (self-measured), it will fit in most systems easily. There is no RGB either. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE by XFX from all angles. Test system Our test system consists of the following: Lian Li O11 Dynamic Mini V2 Flow (Amazon|Newegg) ASUS Z890 ProArt Creator WiFi (Amazon|Newegg) Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus (Amazon|Newegg) Thermal Grizzly KryoSheet - 44x37 (Amazon|Newegg) 2x 16GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB (7200 MT/s in XMP) (Amazon|Newegg) Sabrent Rocket4 Plus 2TB SSD (Amazon) Windows 11 25H2 (Build 26200.8246) AMD shared a press driver based on the recently released Adrenaline 26.5.2 that we were required to use. We now move on to our benchmarks. First up, we have Geekbench AI running on ONNX. For some reason, the 9070 GRE does exceptionally well here in both half-precision (FP16) and single-precision (FP32). It manages to beat the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 non-XT, and is only behind the 9070 XT. Since Geekbench runs in short bursts instead of continuously hammering the graphics card, it seems the GRE's faster boost clocks are helping here. Next up, we move to the UL Procyon AI test suite, starting with the image generation benchmark. We chose the Stable Diffusion XL FP16 test since it is the most intense workload available on Procyon. The Nvidia cards do very well here, as even the 4070 out-muscles AMD's best fairy easily. The positive thing about the GRE is that it gets quite close to the 9070 non-XT in this test; this indicates that the VRAM does not play a very big role here, as SD XL relies on float16 (FP16). So this is something to keep in mind again. If you wish to work with float32 AI workloads, graphics cards with larger than 12 GB buffers would likely emerge as victors. Regardless, the gains are still massive on AMD's 9000 series compared to the 7000 series. Following image generation, we move to the text generation benchmark. This is one test where the 9070 GRE struggled, quite a lot. It seems that the 12 GB VRAM and lower memory bandwidth of the new Radeon 9070 GRE are hurting it quite a bit; the split is massive, especially in a test like Llama2, which packs 13 billion parameters. As such, in all the tests, the 9070 GRE is the slowest of the lot. Next, we tried Blender, and here the AMD GPUs were beaten by Nvidia. Rendering is something the Green team has always had a lead over the Red side, and it has not changed so far. On the positive side, though, the 9070 GRE shows significantly better results than the 7800 XT, which means AMD is on the right path. Catching up to Nvidia, though, will require a lot more effort. And we hope HIP and ROCm can keep improving. Wrapping up AI testing, we measured OpenCL throughput in the Geekbench compute benchmark. The RX 9070 GRE alongside the 9070 did not fare well here at all, even falling behind the 7800 XT. Interestingly, even the RTX 5070 could not beat the 4070 on OpenCL, so perhaps this suggests that OpenCL optimization may not have been a priority for either AMD or Nvidia in the modern era. Conclusion We reached the end of our productivity performance review of the 9070 GRE, and we have to say it's a mixed bag. Unlike the 9070 and 9070 XT, the GRE excels in some areas while losing ground fairly easily in others. Similar to how it happened in gaming, any time the card's memory subsystem gets hammered, it tends to fall behind the others. This was the case with text generation, wherein we saw the VRAM sometimes hit its maximum available 12 GB of usage with larger model sizes. So what do we make of the RX 9070 as a productivity hardware? It can certainly be used, but you have to know it has its limitations. For those looking for a GPU that can deal with more, AMD recently unveiled the Radeon AI PRO R9700, which is essentially a 32 GB refresh of the 9070 XT with some additional workstation-based optimizations. On a similar note, the new Ryzen AI Halo platform is something you can consider if you want to set up a local AI processing station. Considering everything, we rate AMD's Radeon RX 9070 GRE a 7.5 out of 10 for its productivity performance. Price is less of a factor for those looking at productivity cases compared to those considering the GPU for gaming, and as such, we felt it did quite decently on many occasions and can be handy if you need a 12 GB GPU and, for some reason, don't want to get Nvidia. Purchase links: RX 9070 / XT / GRE (Amazon US) As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • Does anyone here know if these updates are integrated into the UUP dump isos?
    • Motrix Next 3.9.4 by Razvan Serea Motrix Next is a modern, open-source cross-platform download manager built as the official next-generation successor to the original Motrix project. It has been completely rewritten using Tauri 2, Vue 3, TypeScript, and Rust, while still relying on the powerful Aria2 download engine for high-speed multi-protocol transfers. The app supports HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, ED2K and magnet links, offering advanced features like multi-connection acceleration, task scheduling, bandwidth control, and batch download management. With a significantly reduced install size (around 20MB), it focuses on being lightweight, fast, and resource-efficient compared to traditional Electron-based download tools. Designed for Windows, macOS, and Linux, Motrix Next delivers a clean, modern UI inspired by Material Design 3 principles, with smooth animations and a minimal workflow. It improves usability through better download organization, system tray integration, and enhanced torrent handling including selective file downloads and tracker management. Motrix Next features: Multi-protocol downloads — HTTP, FTP, BitTorrent, Magnet, .torrent, ED2K, and Metalink tasks BitTorrent — Selective file download, DHT, peer exchange, encryption controls, metadata caching, GeoIP peer flags, and tracker probing Browser extension integration — Embedded Extension API with independent authentication, download confirmation, smart auto-submit, filename hints, referer/cookie forwarding, and real-time controls (Chrome Web Store · Edge Add-ons) Safe filename handling — Content-Disposition, RFC 2047, non-UTF-8, percent-encoded, and extensionless URL resolution with path traversal sanitization Download organization — Favorite and recent folders, optional file-type categorization, stale-record cleanup, and completed history backed by SQLite Concurrent downloads — Independent controls for active tasks, HTTP connections per server, segments per file, and BT peer limits Speed control — Global and per-task upload/download limits with day-of-week and time-of-day scheduling System integration — Tray operation, optional tray speed display, macOS Dock badge/progress, protocol handlers for magnet://, thunder://, and motrixnext:// Lightweight mode — Destroys the WebView on minimize-to-tray while Rust keeps the engine, task monitor, notifications, history, and extension routing alive Notifications and power options — Native task start/complete/failure notifications, keep-awake during downloads, and optional shutdown after completion Network controls — Scoped proxy support for downloads, app updates, and tracker updates, plus system proxy detection Auto-update channels — Stable, Beta, and Latest Across Channels policies with separate download and install phases Diagnostics — Structured logs, exportable diagnostic ZIPs, database integrity checks, automatic DB rebuild, and Linux GPU rendering fallback Personalization — Light/dark/system theme, 10 color schemes, 26 languages, and first-launch system language detection Motrix Next 3.9.4 changelog: Motrix Next 3.9.4 promotes the 3.9.4 beta cycle to stable. This release refreshes bundled engine binaries, improves task detail readability and copy actions, expands link handling for magnet and ED2K workflows, polishes responsive navigation and text wrapping, updates browser extension documentation, and refines network preference controls. New Features Task Detail copy actions — Added copyable values for task metadata and reusable render functions for long text fields. Magnet and ED2K lifecycle support — Added task lifecycle handling for magnet and ED2K links. History cleanup for deleted tasks — Deleted tasks can now remove matching history records. User-Agent management — Added user-agent management and improved related network preference controls. Browser extension documentation — Added the Firefox Add-ons link for the Motrix Next extension. Improvements Engine binaries — Updated bundled binaries for supported architectures. Task Detail readability — Long task names, URLs, tracker values, and copyable metadata now render more clearly. Deletion messaging — Refined localized task deletion text for clarity and consistency. Text wrapping — Improved URI input wrapping and task name multiline display. Navigation layout — Improved sub-navigation responsiveness. Disk allocation default — Changed the default file allocation method to trunc. Proxy controls — Improved proxy button styling in network preferences. Download: Motrix Next 64-bit | ARM64 | macOS ~20.0 MB (Open Source) Links: Website | macOS / Linux | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
    • NVIDIA officially supports Ubuntu, as linked above with the GeForce NOW Hands on I did in collaboration with Paul Hill.
    • TO be clear I am not running linux today, however I keep thinking about it. And I want to make sure there are minimal obstacles if I decide to make that switch in the coming months.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
    • Dedicated
      Conjor earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Dedicated
      Mark Spruce earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Collaborator
      conkir earned a badge
      Collaborator
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      479
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      250
    3. 3
      Steven P.
      72
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      69
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!