andy2004 Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 does vista even use GDI ? i could swear it doesnt and GDI is only XP. Older aplications which use GDI are supported on vista but internally are remapped where possible. from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb173477.aspx The primary API for programming graphics since the early days of Windows has been the Graphical Device Interface (GDI). This API was designed to handle a plethora of 2D output devices and formed the basis for the Windows user interface experience. DirectDraw and Direct3D were introduced as alternative APIs to support full-screen games and 3D rendering as extensions to the existing hardware of the time. Interactions with GDI were complicated, and the effective intermixing of traditional GDI elements with Direct3D elements has been limited by this design. The Windows XP version of WDM, known as XPDM, reflects the side-by-side nature of GDI and Direct3D (see Figure 1). Figure 1. Graphics APIs in Windows XP Over the years, the power of 3D video cards has grown dramatically to the point where the vast majority of hardware is dedicated to this function. A new driver model, Windows Vista Display Driver Model (WDDM), brings the GPU and Direct3D to the forefront, allowing the creation of an entirely new experience, the 3D desktop, that seamlessly blends the 2D world of GDI with the power of modern programmable GPUs. With WDDM, the video hardware is driven entirely by Direct3D, and all other graphics interfaces communicate with the video hardware via the new Direct3D?centric driver model (see Figure 2). Figure 2. Graphics APIs in Windows Vista Windows Presentation Foundation from: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa970268.aspx Windows Presentation Foundation (WPF) is a next-generation presentation system for building Windows client applications with visually stunning user experiences. With WPF, you can create a wide range of both standalone and browser-hosted applications. Some examples are Yahoo! Messenger and the New York Times Reader, as well as the Contoso Healthcare Sample Application that is shown in the following figure. The core of WPF is a resolution-independent and vector-based rendering engine that is built to take advantage of modern graphics hardware. WPF extends the core with a comprehensive set of application-development features that include Extensible Application Markup Language (XAML), controls, data binding, layout, 2-D and 3-D graphics, animation, styles, templates, documents, media, text, and typography. WPF is included in the Microsoft .NET Framework, so you can build applications that incorporate other elements of the .NET Framework class library. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazysah Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Looks very good. I'm quite excited for this one :) Yeah same here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fagutish Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 does vista even use GDI ? i could swear it doesnt and GDI is only XP. Older aplications which use GDI are supported on vista but internally are remapped where possible. the GDI vs. WDM situation is a little more convoluted than it should be since GDI was alot of things for alot of people. You're absolutley right about Vista "remapping" GDI calls to render legacy (read: almost every app out there) applications. Which is what were talking about here when we say WLM v9 M1 doesn't use WLM as we can see the consequence of using GDI and calling for the removal of window borders, the loss of drop shadow. (you can also see this phenomenon in Zune app, iTunes and various other Windows applications that have non standard windows) So Vista uses GDI calls simply to slap them on to the desktop window manager (dwm.exe) which is a part of the directx window rendering service in vista AKA DCE (desktop composition engine) The part of GDI that Vista lacks at certain points in time is the rendering service portion of GDI. The part of GDI that renders the stuff on your monitor. That is now offloaded to DWM.exe in vista but ONLY when Aero is enabled. Thus, if your gcard doesnt support aero or you choose to run on classic theme youre back to GDI window drawing and everythings just like xp on the rendering side. Vista Home basic, contrary to popular belief, has DWM installed and enabled but microsoft has enabled some artificial barriers so users cannot have translucent windows etc. Its still DirectX rendered though so you get all the snappyness and goodness of vector based rendering via graphics card. WPF on the other hand will work in both DWM and GDI environments. Its simply another API for programmers to present their application to users. I hope this helps solve the confusion or maybe its borderline TLDR.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOHW Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Regardless, it looks gorgeous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EduardValencia Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 This isn't the final GUI,it will be better in the next builds.Right now we can't appreciate WPF in action,they have to work in performace and reliability too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tsupersonic Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 It looks more or less the same as the current version, but how much different can an IM program really be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julius Caro Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Am I only one who thinks that is terrible? Light blue, gloss on text, some sort of blurred clouds? Whatever happened to simplicity? :no: +1. It looks hideous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 (N) doesn't look much better than the current build Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EduardValencia Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 Yeah it doesen't look better ;/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Menge Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 not excited at all. i've been thinking of switching to Pidgin for a while, but i would miss sending custom emoticons - which is the only thing in WLM that i use that Pidgin doesn't have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunknMunky Veteran Posted August 12, 2008 Veteran Share Posted August 12, 2008 Honestly I think it looks ugly, I much prefer the look of WLM 8.5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BajiRav Posted August 12, 2008 Author Share Posted August 12, 2008 I know I'm going to catch a ton of flak here about my next comment, but I feel brave this morning.Nothing irks me more than people commenting on a piece of software that isn't even in the BETA test phase, and how it looks crappy, or they don't like one feature or another, or even asking if it's going to have "Feature Q" instead of "Feature R" or even "Features Q and R" - and then pass judgement on it as if it's the finished product. Heaven help you if, when you were newborn that your parents didn't like how you turned-out because you had the wrong head-shape or that your fingers and/or toes weren't long enough. Since this is an M1 build, it means that it runs. It may crash, it may have a minimally-new feature-set if that, and may not have any other features that "the outside world" wants at that time because of internal code-changes, and it's UI is not going to be the end-product's look and/or feel. It means that they can say "Whew! It passes code review and the first smoke-test. Now, to fix the bugs we know about and find more bugs" Have some perspective, people! :| --ScottKin Although I see your point, I don't have any such faith in the Messenger team. Experience with last couple of betas has been real bad. If these shots are legit, this is pretty much what we will end up getting in the end. I would love to be proven wrong though. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echilon Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 The inclusion of WPF is enough to make me want to upgrade. XAML rocks. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ienhz Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 the mockup in the "windows live groups" link looks way better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
y_notm Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 The reason I'm assuming its still GDI and not WPF is partially due toA. The windows have no drop shadows in Vista in those screenshots and also B. Its too similar to their GDI interface from 8.x and below to be a full rewrite. IMHO anyway.. Also check out Yahoo's WPF-using Messenger. That's the kind of thing most people were expecting hoping for.. A. has nothing to do with whether it's being rendered by GDI or WPF. You can remove the frames in WPF just as easily (if not easier) than you can in WinForms/Win32/GDI+ B. Is a much more reasonable reason to believe its being rendered by GDI, but then again they may be taking advantage of the new features of the WPF platform without dramatically changing the interface and risking alienating the hundreds of millions of current users. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadgeek9 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Great, now Messenger won't take 5 minutes to load, maybe 20 minutes - BLOAT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+shift. MVC Posted August 13, 2008 MVC Share Posted August 13, 2008 Not bad actually. Let's just hope it isn't slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zerologic Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Yeah it doesen't look better ;/ Just shows, you can have a company like Microsoft, with all the money in the world (or near enough) and still no style. Money can't buy style. No matter how early this build is, it's a sign that the Windows Live people behind Messenger really need a lesson in UI design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ci7 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Great, now Messenger won't take 5 minutes to load, maybe 20 minutes - BLOAT 5 min lol what are you running pentium 2 rig ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ci7 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 (edited) Just shows, you can have a company like Microsoft, with all the money in the world (or near enough) and still no style.Money can't buy style. No matter how early this build is, it's a sign that the Windows Live people behind Messenger really need a lesson in UI design. that still alpha 1 WLM ...... so don't expect much i bet you are from same guys who complained about windows 7 M1 looking the same as vista and having nothing more . Edited August 13, 2008 by Skynetfuture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadgeek9 Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 5 min lol what are you running pentium 2 rig ??? You haven't seen the worst of me, I have been known to exaggerate - it takes something like 30 seconds. And no, I don't have a Pentium II, I have a Pentium M 1.73 GHz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ViperAFK Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 Yeah, I thought it was meant to be made in WPF? Hmm. I think there was an article that said it is going to use WPF effects but not be completely built in WPF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qdave Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 who put display pics on the left! otherwise it looks good :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevoJD Posted August 13, 2008 Share Posted August 13, 2008 I actually prefer the display pics on the left. It's more natural, why do you think the display pics for forums are on the left? :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Matthew S. Subscriber² Posted August 13, 2008 Subscriber² Share Posted August 13, 2008 Well, these screenshots don't look like a brand new or WPF app. Umm what is a WPF app supposed to look like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts