| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Windows 8's desktop mode: Microsoft's 'Classic' |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-03-06 23:27:08 |
| As you may have seen, David's been taking care of OSNews for a few days because I'm quite busy with work. Still, there's one thing I'd like to talk about: the desktop mode in Windows 8. I wish I could've added this to the first impressions article, but I only arrived at this conclusion yesterday: desktop mode in Windows 8 is Microsoft's equivalent of Mac OS X's Classic mode. |
|
| RE[3]: Metro |
| By ViktorRabe on 2012-03-08 12:26:25 |
|
> People are sheep who go with whatever's installed on their drive when they buy their computer. Always have been, always will be. If a Linux distro were to get the marketing right it could very well gain momentum. Wait for it .... > Not that I lament their not moving en masse to some form of Linux one bit. Jackpot! "Hey, I'd really like to see Linux make it big, if they just could get the marketing right. But the invasion of Noobs is on the other hand a frightening image. I stay with my carefully cultivated exclusivity, thank you very much. We don't need a frakkin' mass market!" Schizophrenia at its best. |
 - Score: 2 |
| RE[6]: The difference is... |
| By malxau on 2012-03-08 12:50:31 |
|
> What nonsense are you talking about? IIS runs a service and has nothing to do with Metro. There are many things that are interrelated here. Metro is a UI. WinRT is an API for Metro. The Desktop is a UI, and Win32 is an API for the Desktop. IIS uses Win32, even though it runs as a service. Although it exposes no direct UI, it exists in a desktop world by virtue of the API it is using, and the environment that the API lives in prevents it moving to an alternate API. My original post was trying to point out that the API difference here is the key part. The WinRT API just doesn't support the kind of things Win32 does. It doesn't support things like services. It doesn't support long lived multitasking things. It doesn't support common IPC mechanisms. The kind of things IIS needs are absent. It is not a successor technology, it is a parallel universe with heavy restrictions. For everything that can't live with those restrictions, Win32 (and all of the layers that eventually call it) is the only game in town. This is very different to OS 9/OS X, where OS 9 technologies had an equivalent on OS X, and a decent abstraction layer to make porting possible. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Microsoft could follow a lot simpler plan. |
| By axilmar on 2012-03-08 13:39:43 |
|
First of all, the Metro 'desktop' screen could be another shell, selectable by an option in the control panel. The desktop versions of Windows would come with the windows explorer as the default shell; the tablet version of windows would come with the 'Metro' screen as the default shell. The user could then change the shell, by the control panel option. Secondly, the Metro shell or Windows Explorer shell should be available as an application too, runnable at the user's will. This would allow developers to test their Metro applications very easily, just by launching the Metro shell and then running the specific application. Thirdly, Microsoft shouldn't deprecate Win32. There is a huge amount of software based on it, either directly using Win32 or indirectly through 3rd party applications. Win32 and Metro should run side-by-side, on top of a new graphical subsystem that can accommodate all needs. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[7]: The difference is... |
| By lucas_maximus on 2012-03-08 13:45:13 |
| IIS for a while will just Win32 and Some point they will either just have another API for services. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Metro |
| By bassbeast on 2012-03-08 15:12:13 |
|
I gotta agree, nobody is gonna deal with all the hassles and the "busted toilets" as i call them, the bugs that simply never get fixed like serious driver issues, lack of complete docs, lack of good regression testing and QA in Linux just to get rid of Windows, not when Windows 7 is supported until 2020 at the earliest and more likely if Win 8 doesn't pan out may get an XP style extension until they come up with another winner. I'd say the bigger problem with Win 8 is metro is obviously a touch OS when touch is by far the minority interface and frankly won't be changing. Sure iPads are nice but how many people want to poke their greasy fingers at their monitor or laptop all day? I'd say less than 1% of the x86/x64 units being sold are touch enabled and when you take out kiosks and POS machines the numbers are so tiny to be worthless as a target audience. IMHO what MSFT should have done was REALLY rip off Apple instead of just going halfway, I mean you don't see Apple trying to run vanilla iOS on the new macbooks do you? of course not. they should have left WinTab just that, an OS for tablets, and kept Windows what it was, which is an OS for desktops and laptops. Instead with the incredible stupidity that can only come from the mind of Ballmer you'll have Win 8 ARM which will be a Windows that doesn't actually run Windows programs....now think about that for a minute. Your average Windows buyer doesn't know ARM from an Xbox so what do you THINK will happen? i can answer that as i saw it first hand last Xmas season when a local retailer was selling "Windows tablets!" with a little CE in the corner. All people knew was it LOOKED like WinXP yet when they got it home none of their Windows programs would run! They brought it back en masse and they ended up covering the Win logo on the boxes and selling them at a loss. Mark my words unless they seriously change the name and marketing strategy you are gonna see the end of MSBob jokes as those will be replaced with Win 8 jokes. When people see the name Windows they expect to be able to run Windows programs, this WILL be the case in x86 but won't be the case in ARM. Now most folks can't even tell you if they have 32 bits or 64, you expect them to know how to tell identical looking Windows versions by knowing the arch? I don't care if metro is the sweetest thing your eyes have ever beheld Mr Holwerda you have to admit that is full of fail. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE: Microsoft could follow a lot simpler plan. |
| By kaiwai on 2012-03-08 16:19:31 |
|
> First of all, the Metro 'desktop' screen could be another shell, selectable by an option in the control panel. The desktop versions of Windows would come with the windows explorer as the default shell; the tablet version of windows would come with the 'Metro' screen as the default shell. The user could then change the shell, by the control panel option. Secondly, the Metro shell or Windows Explorer shell should be available as an application too, runnable at the user's will. This would allow developers to test their Metro applications very easily, just by launching the Metro shell and then running the specific application. Thirdly, Microsoft shouldn't deprecate Win32. There is a huge amount of software based on it, either directly using Win32 or indirectly through 3rd party applications. Win32 and Metro should run side-by-side, on top of a new graphical subsystem that can accommodate all needs. Why shouldn't Microsoft deprecate Win32? why not develop WinRT further so that desktop and metro applications can be based up on it? why not allow traditional desktop applications be written using XAML for the front end and C++/C/C#/etc for the backend? |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Metro |
| By brettlegree on 2012-03-08 16:20:11 |
|
I expect we might get a dedicated/forced way to enter a "fallback" or "classic" mode, for corporate use or people who don't want to use Metro. If not, there will be third-party apps to do this (Stardock already released one called Start8 - they claim it took only one day to code it). |
| - Score: 1 |
| w8 metro |
| By l3v1 on 2012-03-08 18:53:47 |
|
Well, this is what I said a few days ago here: > I'm hoping some 3rd party fellas will quickly make shell replacements available so we can ditch the metro junk. And lo and behold, at least a menu comes to life: http://www.stardock.com/products... Hehh, we got Start :) Surely more to follow. I'm waiting for the first usable W7 shell replacement for W8 and we'll be fine. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: weather app? |
| By TomF on 2012-03-08 21:00:48 |
|
this Moron has been using Windows in all sorts of versions since 3.0, Linux since it was 0.99 (slackware)... Mac OS since 6.0... been playing with the Windows 8 dev preview since September 2011 and fiddling with the new JDK... of course based on a single post YOU who have no doubt super-judging skills are free ro call me a moron... I probably am even paying attention. Yours MoronUK PS: anyone else .. please tell me why I need to see all apps maximised on 30" ? |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE: Microsoft could follow a lot simpler plan. |
| By TomF on 2012-03-08 21:07:48 |
|
> First of all, the Metro 'desktop' screen could be another shell, selectable by an option in the control panel. The desktop versions of Windows would come with the windows explorer as the default shell; the tablet version of windows would come with the 'Metro' screen as the default shell. The user could then change the shell, by the control panel option. Secondly, the Metro shell or Windows Explorer shell should be available as an application too, runnable at the user's will. This would allow developers to test their Metro applications very easily, just by launching the Metro shell and then running the specific application. Thirdly, Microsoft shouldn't deprecate Win32. There is a huge amount of software based on it, either directly using Win32 or indirectly through 3rd party applications. Win32 and Metro should run side-by-side, on top of a new graphical subsystem that can accommodate all needs. couldn't agree more - that would be the sensible thing to do and would allow a fair check .. and longer term "whats best" as to Win32... considering the future was once COM.. then COM+ ... then .NET (with winforms, later with another gui thing (sorry - forget) )... now back to some COM derivate... its hard to follow MS as to what should be followed if you get what I mean :/ ta Tom PS: also known as a moron to some |
| - Score: 1 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |