Windows 8 to get rid of Aero UI

Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm

One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from having to
upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they upgraded to Vista,
and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now getting rid of it? Now
almost all computers, even those with integrated graphics can handle
Aero, now is the time to go back to 2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern x86's
are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based Windows? The
chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's with built-in
GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor has 3D hardware.
Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

On 5/24/2012 1:59 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm


One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from having to
upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they upgraded to Vista,
and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now getting rid of it? Now
almost all computers, even those with integrated graphics can handle
Aero, now is the time to go back to 2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern x86's
are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based Windows? The
chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's with built-in
GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor has 3D hardware.
Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

Microsoft mistakenly -- and late to the game -- thinks that smartphones
and tablets are the future. That's what they said about netbooks and you
saw how successful that was. Methinks Windows 7 may last longer than XP
unless Microsoft wakes up.

--
Alias

On Thu, 24 May 2012 14:45:00 +0200, Alias
wrote:

On 5/24/2012 1:59 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm


One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from having to
upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they upgraded to Vista,
and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now getting rid of it? Now
almost all computers, even those with integrated graphics can handle
Aero, now is the time to go back to 2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern x86's
are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based Windows? The
chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's with built-in
GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor has 3D hardware.
Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

Microsoft mistakenly -- and late to the game -- thinks that smartphones
and tablets are the future. That's what they said about netbooks and you
saw how successful that was. Methinks Windows 7 may last longer than XP
unless Microsoft wakes up.

First, smartphones will not replace desktop systems. They will always
be needed for those who do big work not on-the-go, squinting at a
small screen. There was a time when PCs first came out that the buzz
was mainframe computers would go out, well they are still here and in
a big way.

Also, world wide there are more WinXP systems than Vista/Win7 systems.
Not everyone in the world can afford to upgrade their systems to meet
Win7 requirements. Then there are those who don't like Win7 and have
WinXP systems that work perfectly, no incentive to upgrade.




--
=========== Tecknomage ===========
Computer Systems Specialist
ComputerHelpForum.org Staff Member
IT Technician
San Diego, CA

On 24/05/2012 9:40 AM, Tecknomage wrote:
[...]
First, smartphones will not replace desktop systems. They will always
be needed for those who do big work not on-the-go, squinting at a
small screen. There was a time when PCs first came out that the buzz
was mainframe computers would go out, well they are still here and in
a big way.

Also, world wide there are more WinXP systems than Vista/Win7 systems.
Not everyone in the world can afford to upgrade their systems to meet
Win7 requirements. Then there are those who don't like Win7 and have
WinXP systems that work perfectly, no incentive to upgrade.

All of which are signs that computers are a "maturing technology", I
think. The functions of OSs are pretty well settled. The differences
between computers appear to be mostly in how applications are bundled
and/or integrated with the OS and hardware. We seem to be at the same
stage as powered vehicles about 100 years ago, when the technology began
to split into cars/busses, tractors, and trucks, along with specialised
gear such as bulldozers.

IMO, there is one development still to come: the truly portable
multi-function thingamajig. It will probably not be a single gadget, but
several devices distributed over the body of the user: phone, computer,
GPS, personal communicator, camera, etc. Maybe we will buy vests,
hoodies, etc, with these devices built in. Or slip on a few bracelets
and a head set. Or carry something like a walking stick.

All my experience with tablets is secondhand. The people who seem most
comfortable with them seem to focus on a couple or three uses, eg,
social networking, e-mail, surfing. One loves his iPad because he can
use to compose music collaboratively in real time. It seems to me,
though, that a tablet is little more than a smart-phone without the phone.

Best,
Wolf K.

On Thu, 24 May 2012 07:59:44 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm

One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from having to
upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they upgraded to Vista,
and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now getting rid of it? Now
almost all computers, even those with integrated graphics can handle
Aero, now is the time to go back to 2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern x86's
are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based Windows? The
chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's with built-in
GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor has 3D hardware.
Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

In Windows 7 the Aero interface can be turned off, so there's no need to
update hardware. So that doesn't seem (to me) to be a good reason to
drop it altogether from W8.

But I can't always figure out how Microsoft makes its design choices.

I do think people who design interfaces should be required to use them
before imposing them on others. Or if that requirement already exists,
it needs to be enforced :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 24/05/2012 18:56, Gene E. Bloch wrote:


But I can't always figure out how Microsoft makes its design choices.

Then there's still hope for you!

--

Jeff

Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2012 07:59:44 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm


One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from
having to upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they
upgraded to Vista, and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now
getting rid of it? Now almost all computers, even those with
integrated graphics can handle Aero, now is the time to go back to
2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern
x86's are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based
Windows? The chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's
with built-in GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor
has 3D hardware. Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

In Windows 7 the Aero interface can be turned off, so there's no need
to update hardware. So that doesn't seem (to me) to be a good reason
to drop it altogether from W8.

Which I did, first thing, along with installing Classic Shell. Dropping
Aero is the first good thing I've heard about Win 8. Now if they'd just
drop touch screens...
--
Crash

Atheism is a matter of faith, too.

On Thu, 24 May 2012 10:56:35 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 07:59:44 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm

One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from having to
upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they upgraded to Vista,
and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now getting rid of it? Now
almost all computers, even those with integrated graphics can handle
Aero, now is the time to go back to 2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern x86's
are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based Windows? The
chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's with built-in
GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor has 3D hardware.
Playing to the lowest common denominator.

And risking dividing by zero.

In Windows 7 the Aero interface can be turned off, so there's no need to
update hardware. So that doesn't seem (to me) to be a good reason to
drop it altogether from W8.

But I can't always figure out how Microsoft makes its design choices.

Possible answers:

1) Easy-peasy. Darts or equivalent.

2) "Computers have made a great change in people's lives. We need
to continue making changes."

3) __________ (Go ahead. Come up with your own.)

I do think people who design interfaces should be required to use them
before imposing them on others. Or if that requirement already exists,
it needs to be enforced :-)

You also need to make sure that they are not masochists. Or
sadists. understatementTesting for this appears to be lacking./

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2012 07:59:44 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm

One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from having to
upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they upgraded to Vista,
and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now getting rid of it? Now
almost all computers, even those with integrated graphics can handle
Aero, now is the time to go back to 2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern x86's
are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based Windows? The
chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's with built-in
GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor has 3D hardware.
Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

In Windows 7 the Aero interface can be turned off, so there's no need to
update hardware. So that doesn't seem (to me) to be a good reason to
drop it altogether from W8.

But I can't always figure out how Microsoft makes its design choices.

I do think people who design interfaces should be required to use them
before imposing them on others. Or if that requirement already exists,
it needs to be enforced :-)


Turning off Aero saves power on mobile devices.

Paul

On 5/24/2012 2:26 PM, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:
Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2012 07:59:44 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm



One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from
having to upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they
upgraded to Vista, and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now
getting rid of it? Now almost all computers, even those with
integrated graphics can handle Aero, now is the time to go back to
2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern
x86's are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based
Windows? The chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's
with built-in GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor
has 3D hardware. Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

In Windows 7 the Aero interface can be turned off, so there's no need
to update hardware. So that doesn't seem (to me) to be a good reason
to drop it altogether from W8.

Which I did, first thing, along with installing Classic Shell. Dropping
Aero is the first good thing I've heard about Win 8. Now if they'd just
drop touch screens...

There are a few nursing homes that use the touch screen APIs on wall
mounted stations for them to do their paper work. No keyboards are
needed for what they do. Most just use the pencil eraser to rapidly go
from one choice to another. I believe you'll find touch screens used in
a lot of medical facilities.

On Thu, 24 May 2012 19:58:45 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:

On 24/05/2012 18:56, Gene E. Bloch wrote:


But I can't always figure out how Microsoft makes its design choices.

Then there's still hope for you!

My LOTD award goes to you.

In case it's not in the Acronym Dictionary (since I think I just made it
up, although it's an obvious choice), that's Laugh Of The Day.

I just looked. It's in the Acronym Dictionary :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Thu, 24 May 2012 16:50:15 -0400, Paul wrote:

Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2012 07:59:44 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm

One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from having to
upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they upgraded to Vista,
and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now getting rid of it? Now
almost all computers, even those with integrated graphics can handle
Aero, now is the time to go back to 2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern x86's
are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based Windows? The
chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's with built-in
GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor has 3D hardware.
Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

In Windows 7 the Aero interface can be turned off, so there's no need to
update hardware. So that doesn't seem (to me) to be a good reason to
drop it altogether from W8.

But I can't always figure out how Microsoft makes its design choices.

I do think people who design interfaces should be required to use them
before imposing them on others. Or if that requirement already exists,
it needs to be enforced :-)


Turning off Aero saves power on mobile devices.

Paul

No problem for me. I just keep turning the crank.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

"GreyCloud" wrote in message
. ..
On 5/24/2012 2:26 PM, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:
Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2012 07:59:44 -0400, Yousuf Khan wrote:

Microsoft: Windows 8 Won't Use 'Aero' Interface / Infopackets.com
http://www.infopackets.com/news/busi...nterfa ce.htm



One has to wonder why after all of the pain and suffering from
having to upgrade XP computers to handle 3D graphics when they
upgraded to Vista, and into Windows 7, why Microsoft is just now
getting rid of it? Now almost all computers, even those with
integrated graphics can handle Aero, now is the time to go back to
2D?

The answer is probably pretty easy, most ARM-based computers aren't
powerful enough to handle anything more than 2D. But most modern
x86's are now capable of 3D, so why not retain it for x86-based
Windows? The chipmakers, Intel and AMD, both have 3D-capable CPU's
with built-in GPU's, so that means everyone with an x86 processor
has 3D hardware. Playing to the lowest common denominator.

Yousuf Khan

In Windows 7 the Aero interface can be turned off, so there's no need
to update hardware. So that doesn't seem (to me) to be a good reason
to drop it altogether from W8.

Which I did, first thing, along with installing Classic Shell. Dropping
Aero is the first good thing I've heard about Win 8. Now if they'd just
drop touch screens...

There are a few nursing homes that use the touch screen APIs on wall
mounted stations for them to do their paper work. No keyboards are needed
for what they do. Most just use the pencil eraser to rapidly go from one
choice to another. I believe you'll find touch screens used in a lot of
medical facilities.


There is no need to delete the touch screen controls, but I think the better
idea would be to give the user the choice of Metro or Start Menu. As it
stands now, MS is pretty much forcing the issue, as the majority of comments
on Win8 have been complaints about the lack of a Start Menu.

Gene E. Bloch wrote:
On Thu, 24 May 2012 19:58:45 +0100, Jeff Layman wrote:

On 24/05/2012 18:56, Gene E. Bloch wrote:

But I can't always figure out how Microsoft makes its design
choices.
Then there's still hope for you!

My LOTD award goes to you.

In case it's not in the Acronym Dictionary (since I think I just made
it up, although it's an obvious choice), that's Laugh Of The Day.

I just looked. It's in the Acronym Dictionary :-)

Which Acronym Dictionary do you use? There are several, and I'd like to
add one to my search menu.
--
Crash

"I'm told that Wagner's music is not as bad as it sounds."
~ Mark Twain ~

On 24/05/2012 10:27 AM, Wolf K wrote:
All my experience with tablets is secondhand. The people who seem most
comfortable with them seem to focus on a couple or three uses, eg,
social networking, e-mail, surfing. One loves his iPad because he can
use to compose music collaboratively in real time. It seems to me,
though, that a tablet is little more than a smart-phone without the phone.

Yeah, I was a big doubter about the utility of a tablet, but then I
bought a Blackberry Playbook, and I gotta say I find myself using that
way more than I ever thought. It's absolutely perfect for surfing, and
it's passable for email. That's all I really use it for, but then again,
that's what I used my computer for 90% of the time too.

Regarding surfing, the Playbook has Adobe Flash built-in so it's much
more useful than an Apple iPad for surfing. If an iPad is only 75% as
useful as a full PC for surfing, then the Playbook is 95% as useful.
Very few websites that it can't handle properly.

Yousuf Khan