Does anyone still prefer the Windows Classic UI to Aero Glass?


Recommended Posts

What's interesting for me is that I couldn't stand the Vista UI, yet the Windows 7 UI is fine. I think it's probably that awful teal border they added in Vista (wtf were they thinking?), but I'm not sure.

I couldn't stand Vista's UI either. Not Aero, that I liked, but just in general, a lot of the new features were just poorly implemented or just bad design decisions. The favorites list in the file manager for example was especially bad.. some of it you could customize, some you couldn't.. all in all a chore to use.. I went and installed FindeXer on my one Server 2008 install for the same reason. 7 has a few quirks or leftovers from way back that need updating yet but all in all they really made it a lot more pleasing to work with. Just needs a little more refinement to make it perfect.

  • 3 weeks later...

I kind of like xp's look. I really wish they made aero basic more like the look of xp and function as snappy as in xp so my old rigs can run it with their geforce 4s however it is very slow on them and opening a pic of trying to watch a video cause bsods yet the aero basic ui looks less demanding then xp s ui which causes no bsods on the same old machines. I guess the system requirements for vista/7 are really misleading. I actually went out and bought a retail copy of vista ultimate for my old rig back in the day thinking no big deal I don't need glass windows I'll just use classic and I thought it would run just fine like running xp, boy was I ever wrong. Even if you didn't want glass and even classic you still needed to have a vid card that fully supported dx9 to play vids that worked just fine in xp on same hardware.

But back on topic I change between aero glass and basic every now and again. Classic looks way to weird in win 7 with the new taskbar and the window buttons like the back and foreward being shiny blue on dull grey classic windows.

  • 5 weeks later...

By now, you probably noticed this in other threads I posted in. I CANNOT stand classic theme. I HATE HATE HATE it. I want it gone in Windows 8. I'm gonna hope Microsoft cuts it off like they did with the classic start menu.

It should NEVER be used in Windows 7, for many reasons said above... disabling Aero means you lose GPU acceleration and extra features such as peek and thumbnails. Also, even if I could stand classic, Windows 7's implementation of it would be enough to put me off it anyways! Windows 7's UI was designed around Aero (and the basic theme it falls back to). Classic trying to mimic that layout is just hideous.

I find it funny how everyone mentions they used classic in XP, purely because Luna was hideous. I agree, Luna was not the best first impression of a truly skinned UI by Microsoft. However, uxtheme patching was available very early and by now there's a gazillion themes for it that look infinitely better than Luna and Classic. Even Royale and Zune are much better to look at, and you don't even have to patch the system for those two!

In the time I used XP, I used Luna silver for maybe a month... then I had cXP2, then coughdrop, then Royale Vista II and countless other themes I had downloaded years later after using XP and switched around a bunch. I never used Luna beyond that or classic .. ever.

Even before Windows XP even came out, I couldn't stand classic. In Win2k I was regularly using Windowblinds.

Plain, grey boxes with no soft shades or gradients or any sort of real design is just an abomination in 2002, let alone 2010. Remember, the classic UI is technically the same framework created for Windows 95. In 1995. The only advances made to it, ever, were the extra gradient in the caption bar... an extra line of highlight in buttons (only if you left it on the default color anyways), and what... lil menu shadows in win2k that you barely could see? Any other changes MS made to classic were simply color and font changes that anyone can do in the advanced appearance panel. How long do you think Microsoft will continue lugging around that same exact framework? Windows 7 is already proving that Classic is well beyond it's welcome. I hope Windows 8 cuts it off completely! I hate seeing it, I hate when people post screenshots/videos using it, I don't wanna see it anymore.

EDIT: And yes, I'm aware that classic is needed for safe mode and servers, and for compatibility. However, it would not be impossible for them to create a new framework that is graphical at its most minimal state, and make new high contrast themes with the modern design. Heck, why not just make Aero basic the bottom level instead of classic? Look at Linux, when running in low graphics states, it still has a skinned UI in Gnome/KDE/XFCE capable of at least a skinned XP look. There's really no need for plain grey boxes to continue being the foundation of our windows, and it would probably improve performance if there was less to 'cover up' with Aero and so on.

My understanding is that Aero offloads some of the work to the GPU which means you get a prettier desktop without paying the price of reduced performance (or at least not much of a price). This probably assumes you have a half-decent video card.

If I were to ever discover that Classic was noticeably faster then I would switch to it in an instant. Pretty things are neat when you first install the OS but I'd rather have an efficient system. I've already disabled the overly cutesy (but mostly useless) stuff like Aero-Peek.

I do not prefer or like the classic look and enjoy all the little things aero provides. I will state however I use classic not aero on my netbook because I use that for web browsing and tuning cars so it's just not a feature I truly need when battery performance is key. I will say aero runs very well on my netbook when I have turned it on and when I updated it from Win7 Starter to Home Premium it was on by default.

EDIT: And yes, I'm aware that classic is needed for safe mode and servers, and for compatibility. However, it would not be impossible for them to create a new framework that is graphical at its most minimal state, and make new high contrast themes with the modern design. Heck, why not just make Aero basic the bottom level instead of classic? Look at Linux, when running in low graphics states, it still has a skinned UI in Gnome/KDE/XFCE capable of at least a skinned XP look. There's really no need for plain grey boxes to continue being the foundation of our windows, and it would probably improve performance if there was less to 'cover up' with Aero and so on.

This is exactly why I can't see them forcing the theme/DWM engines on a server. It's the same reason why any respectable *Nix server runs in console mode and not with KDE/Gnome/whatever. It's just another point of failure that can bring the server down, be it the graphics system, a badly written theme, buggy drivers, other supporting software, etc etc. On systems that are driving mission critical "it better run or the boss will have me killed" software, the last thing you need is frivolous stuff like glass and effects. It has no place on a server.

And since the desktop and server platforms typically share the same "guts", it'll carry over into the desktop environment too.

This is exactly why I can't see them forcing the theme/DWM engines on a server. It's the same reason why any respectable *Nix server runs in console mode and not with KDE/Gnome/whatever. It's just another point of failure that can bring the server down, be it the graphics system, a badly written theme, buggy drivers, other supporting software, etc etc. On systems that are driving mission critical "it better run or the boss will have me killed" software, the last thing you need is frivolous stuff like glass and effects. It has no place on a server.

And since the desktop and server platforms typically share the same "guts", it'll carry over into the desktop environment too.

Yeah, well, MS has been luggin' around that same exact framework for 15 years. Think it's gonna be around in 2015? 2020? 2030? Just how long are they gonna use the same stuff under the hood?

Yeah, well, MS has been luggin' around that same exact framework for 15 years. Think it's gonna be around in 2015? 2020? 2030? Just how long are they gonna use the same stuff under the hood?

If it ain't broke...

Yeah, well, MS has been luggin' around that same exact framework for 15 years. Think it's gonna be around in 2015? 2020? 2030? Just how long are they gonna use the same stuff under the hood?

Again, depends on server vs desktop. On a server, the latest and greatest UI improvements mean absolutely jack. The only reason I ran with a GUI on my Windows servers is that I had no choice in the matter; on my BSD boxes, an X server is entirely out of the question. It has zero place in a server configuration, and does nothing but add an additional point of failure. It has nothing to do with progress, but reliability and uptime. Do you think *Nix servers are typically console only because they don't have a prettier option? No; KWin/Compiz/etc has written the book on "desktop bling", and they still have no place in a server environment. And since Windows currently cannot run in a purely console mode (yet), they'll continue to support the bare minimum of GUI elements to get the job done.

The reason I keep bringing the server part up is that the desktop and server editions of Windows are built on the same monolithic base, just some parts added/removed/tweaked depending on the installation. For a server install, there must be some sort of basic GUI system that doesn't require 3D acceleration and all that. Until the time Microsoft makes a major design changes under the hood, I can't see the barebones UI going anywhere.

After all that though; I agree with you. It's fugly as hell. I like the console. I like Aero/DWM. But ye olde Win95 look... ew.

  • 2 months later...

Nope, Aero Glass is my favourite and just fits perfect for 7... I really am starting to hate Classic UI... A lot of company's use it as it is claimed to be faster... Or just cause they have stuck with the same computers for year's leading to bad graphics support...

I hope with Windows 8 they finally discontinue the classic UI. We are not in the Windows 95 days anymore.

As for server, they should remove the Classic UI from main windows and leave it on Server ONLY...

Also redesign the aero... I hate when you have aero off... (Aero Basic/No Transparency/Windows 7 Starter/Bad Graphics), it's this horrid grey colour... Why could they not make it to look like the Vista toolbar when Aero was off... Since it makes 7 starter and computers that can't run Aero just look a bit ugly.

I think from a server perspective they need to completely dump the UI (on all versions of Server). This of course is not really possible given how Windows applications (are generally) written. There is nothing prohibiting vendors from releasing console applications, but most don't... than again, for a server all you need are your essential services plus whatever daemon you want running. At least there is Server Core.

As for the classic UI, I miss it for nostalgic reasons (and will ever so often enable it), but generally, the Aero Glass interface is much smoother and productive overall.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
    • Cheers everyone for the replies. It's been very useful. 👍
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!