windows 8 Microsoft Drops Aero from Windows 8

[OOOOOOOO]

The OS that just keeps giving. Perhaps next they can remove all the colour and start using nothing but white, grey and black. Then the transformation back to the mid 80's will be complete.

Windows Aero Glass is hugely dated. They're moving towards minimalist design. Not bad design. There's a difference, and anyone with an ounce of class can see the difference. That said, I don't think what they're doing is quite as good as what they could be doing with the spec they have. But we will see.

[neo158]

How is having two completely different interfaces with each their own set of apps within the same OS making Windows "uniform"?

Because, unlike Apple, Microsoft has to support "legacy" applications that only use the desktop e.g. Office 2010 as well as Metro applications.

[Guest]

Because, unlike Apple, Microsoft has to support "legacy" applications that only use the desktop e.g. Office 2010 as well as Metro applications.

How is removing Aero glass removing application support?

[jakem1]

I always hated aero glass, the whole idea every chrome is transparent just felt weird... looks like MS finally realized this, but now they made windows ultrabright... go from one eye strainer to another...

what's next, they realize the blank titlebar in most windows is a waste of space? and finally move the breadcrum into that space? *gasp*

I always had the feeling aero glass and all the shaddows where just there to say hey look what we can do with DWM and WDDM!

The original goal of Aero Glass was to focus the user's attention on content rather than the chrome of each window. For a time it did achieve this and in general I think it does, especially when compared to the obvious title bars and window borders of XP. When you stack lots of windows you can get some weird colour combinations and patterns in the glass that can be distracting and I guess they're trying to eliminate those. Personally though, I don't mind glass (especially in Win 7) and I'm surprised that Microsoft have dismissed it using such strong language.

Having said that, I think the Zune client looks really good and I think it does a much better job of focussing attention on content rather than controls. Flattening the UI is a good idea as the fake 3D borders and endless gradients in previous versions of Windows and other operating systems feel dated and are distracting. It's important that they get the balance right between flat and bland but I think Windows Phone and the Zune client prove that Microsoft can get this right.

[jakem1]

How is removing Aero glass removing application support?

That's not what he said. If you look at .Neo's comment it's clear that neo158 is referring to the need for immersive and desktop environments in the one OS.

[Noir Angel]

Having been a loyal user of Windows for nearly 15 years these changes are perhaps the most disappointing I have ever seen in a Windows release thus far. Every time I see another announcement about a feature change to Windows 8 it just leaves me more disappointed it would seem. I love Windows 7, I just hope they aren't as hasty to drop support as they were with Vista because as it currently stands I will not be using Windows 8.

[MorganX]

Having been a loyal user of Windows for nearly 15 years these changes are perhaps the most disappointing I have ever seen in a Windows release thus far. Every time I see another announcement about a feature change to Windows 8 it just leaves me more disappointed it would seem. I love Windows 7, I just hope they aren't as hasty to drop support as they were with Vista because as it currently stands I will not be using Windows 8.

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.

[MorganX]

I think Windows Phone and the Zune client prove that Microsoft can get this right.

I agree by Microsoft's past standards which were very low. Still want a windows hub as tight and useable as iTunes; a much higher standard that Microsoft is still far from reaching, if ever, IMO.

[.Neo]

Because, unlike Apple, Microsoft has to support "legacy" applications that only use the desktop e.g. Office 2010 as well as Metro applications.

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.

[George P Global Moderator]

I 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 new apps for OS X from the get-go instead of letting then run only within the old environment. Microsoft on the other hand is 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 you know there's something fundamentally wrong with Metro.

My original point however was that you can't really speak of unification since you're dealing with two completely different interfaces that each run their own separate set of apps within the same OS, not just for legacy purposes.

I'm willing to bet money that MS already has a metro version of it's office apps under development. The problem here is that it didn't have the time needed to release it now. Before the Office team could even get to work the WinRT guys had/have to finish their API work and so on. The only reason access to the desktop on Windows RT ARM devices is around is simply to run Office because they couldn't port it yet. It's one thing to port something small but we're also talking about a group of apps and not just one app. We'll see it in time for Windows 9 though, and by that version I also expect WinRT/metro apps will be able to run on the "desktop" as well. In the long run Win32 is going to be slowly replaced, it's a step by step process and the new APIs don't cover all the areas yet to do it.

[MorganX]

I 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 new apps for OS X from the get-go instead of letting then run only within the old environment. Microsoft on the other hand is 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 was that you can't really speak of unification since you're dealing with two completely different interfaces that each run their own separate set of apps within the same OS, not just for legacy purposes.

IMO there will never be unification nor is it desireable. To unify the Explorer/Desktop UI with Metro will be destorying MDI & True Multitasking. This isn't going to fly, 1 1/3 windows for people who actually work on PCs (Workstation Users, back to the future ;). Not going to happen.

I can see the return of Windows 8 Workstation which uses the Desktop/Explorer UI, with Windows 8 Pro and below being basically a single tasking Metro Environment. I personally don't think MS will get rid of the desktop at all. I will change that opinion when I see meaningful and productive Metro file management. Right now I think MS is just making a huge mess, but it's not done yet and they are clearly still trying to figure out what to do. I'll withold judgment until RTM.

[George P Global Moderator]

IMO there will never be unification nor is it desireable. To unify the Explorer/Desktop UI with Metro will be destorying MDI & True Multitasking. This isn't going to fly, 1 1/3 windows for people who actually work on PCs (Workstation Users, back to the future ;). Not going to happen.

I can see the return of Windows 8 Workstation which uses the Desktop/Explorer UI, with Windows 8 Pro and below being basically a single tasking Metro Environment. I personally don't think MS will get rid of the desktop at all. I will change that opinion when I see meaningful and productive Metro file management. Right now I think MS is just making a huge mess, but it's not done yet and they are clearly still trying to figure out what to do. I'll withold judgment until RTM.

I think you're not taking into account that the next version could very well extend metro app support over to the desktop for those who need/want it. In the end, when that happens, and I expect it will, the desktop and the start screen will be uniformed. The "desktop", probably in Win9, will just be an "area" of the OS that can run multiple windowed apps, like it does now, but it won't be it's own "thing" which it still is in Win8. This is probably the case for now because of how new the APIs on the metro side are and nothing else. If MS's goal in the long run is to replace Win32 with WinRT then extending it to the desktop is the natural next step for it and I don't see anything to indicate they're not going to do that.

[exotoxic]

The average user will just pick it up and click on what seems logical, not ask questions why it is so or why it is like that.

that must be why the average user gets so much malware... britneyspearsnaked.exe :woot:

[.Neo]

I'm willing to bet money that MS already has a metro version of it's office apps under development. The problem here is that it didn't have the time needed to release it now. Before the Office team could even get to work the WinRT guys had/have to finish their API work and so on.

Microsoft should have done a better job at planning in that case. But we'll see what happens...

IMO there will never be unification nor is it desireable. To unify the Explorer/Desktop UI with Metro will be destorying MDI & True Multitasking. This isn't going to fly, 1 1/3 windows for people who actually work on PCs (Workstation Users, back to the future ;). Not going to happen.

Which brings us to:

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.

[BajiRav]

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.

but wasn't classic effectively a different OS? I never used it so do correct me if wrong. It's not the same as supporting old apps on current OS. Classic was probably same as Windows XP mode in 7?

[MorganX]

I think you're not taking into account that the next version could very well extend metro app support over to the desktop for those who need/want it. In the end, when that happens, and I expect it will, the desktop and the start screen will be uniformed. The "desktop", probably in Win9, will just be an "area" of the OS that can run multiple windowed apps, like it does now, but it won't be it's own "thing" which it still is in Win8. This is probably the case for now because of how new the APIs on the metro side are and nothing else. If MS's goal in the long run is to replace Win32 with WinRT then extending it to the desktop is the natural next step for it and I don't see anything to indicate they're not going to do that.

I'm witholding judgment, as right now I don't think MS has a clear roadmap of what it's going to do. I'm abivalent as to whether the desktop is an area or an app. It's the functionality that must remain. No one is trying to hold on to Win32, really. Nor resisting change. But people are unwilling to take steps backwards in functionality or productivity for the sake of change for change's sake. Creating an area to run multiple windows works for me, I don't care how they do it.

[ScorpioRGc1]

I hate to say it, but this could be the one thing that makes me *not* want Win8. I didn't mind the Metro stuff since I'd spend most of my time on the desktop anyways. I didn't mind the new Start screen as I see some potential in it to be very good. But this looks worse than Aero Basic did in Vista/Win7. To me, Aero Basic and this new white UI look so bad and bland that it becomes a distraction to me. I like Aero because it made the OS look sleek and modern while not taking focus away from the task at hand.

I'll still try the Win8 Release Candidate )or whatever they're calling it now) to try to change my own mind, but I'm skeptical of it actually happening. I may be sticking with Win7 for a while. :/

[.Neo]

but wasn't classic effectively a different OS? I never used it so do correct me if wrong. It's not the same as supporting old apps on current OS. Classic was probably same as Windows XP mode in 7?

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.

[Larry the Lobster]

Yes, have you?

Probably since you were still filling your diapers. I've watched users become confused and irritated over the smallest changes. Major ones like this drive them nuts.

[Brandon H Supervisor]

I hate to say it, but this could be the one thing that makes me *not* want Win8. I didn't mind the Metro stuff since I'd spend most of my time on the desktop anyways. I didn't mind the new Start screen as I see some potential in it to be very good. But this looks worse than Aero Basic did in Vista/Win7. To me, Aero Basic and this new white UI look so bad and bland that it becomes a distraction to me. I like Aero because it made the OS look sleek and modern while not taking focus away from the task at hand.

I'll still try the Win8 Release Candidate )or whatever they're calling it now) to try to change my own mind, but I'm skeptical of it actually happening. I may be sticking with Win7 for a while. :/

if the new theme is the only thing that's bothering you then it'd be easy to just install a custom theme and not worry about it anymore would it not?

[~Johnny]

I'm willing to bet money that MS already has a metro version of it's office apps under development. The problem here is that it didn't have the time needed to release it now. Before the Office team could even get to work the WinRT guys had/have to finish their API work and so on. The only reason access to the desktop on Windows RT ARM devices is around is simply to run Office because they couldn't port it yet.

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.

[Brandon H Supervisor]

Probably since you were still filling your diapers. I've watched users become confused and irritated over the smallest changes. Major ones like this drive them nuts.

why do you think MS is including a tutorial?

[MorganX]

Probably since you were still filling your diapers. I've watched users become confused and irritated over the smallest changes. Major ones like this drive them nuts.

They in turn drive Help Desk nuts, which in turn drives IT Dept Nuts, which costs $$$$$$ for basically nothing. Then IT dept says, you know what, let's stay with Windows 7. Then IT Dept actually starts accepting lunches from Google (Chrome OS + Google Apps) and Apple.

MS is playing with fire here. We'll see.

[Skwerl]

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.

[Dot Matrix]

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