Windows 10: Windows 9 Screenshots Leaked

Of course there would be some sort of an appealing design. I am referring to the fancy stuffs that some people are looking forward to.

 

Frankly, Windows 8 (or 8.1) did not offer an appealing design. The colors were from the last century and the square shapes reminded me of Win3.1. I think even XP looked better (before it became too boring after so many years). 7 certainly looks better, although I can understand that some people might choose to turn off Aero and not use any of the glass features. But that's the point - in 7 there is a choice, you can set up the desktop any way you like it. In 8 the choice is gone - everything is flat and square. I did not try third-party stuff, such as WindowBlinds, after all, why do I need to run third-party stuff for something as basic as windows?

As to whether it's important or not - it's clearly a matter or personal preference. I like Aero, but many others do not. It's clear that there has to be a choice.

 

I agree it would be great to have a choice, but whether MS agrees with us is another matter. It might just come down to whether you as a user are willing to adapt to what MS gives you, or whether you search for other options, because realistically, I doubt they will go down the tubes financially if they don't.

 

No.. I don't know you well enough to tell if you're kidding or not.
And I for one do like the new look to Win9 so far.
Jeff

 

I agree. Aero was cool 5 years ago. Nowadays, I couldn't care less what's sitting behind what i'm really using. Most of my time is spent in various apps and IE.

Looking forward to testing this puppy out on the 30th!

 

Choices are nice, but decisions have to be made on what code is justifiable to maintain just to provide an option. For example, the lack of Windows Classic theme in 8. That's simply not used by enough people to have the theme there, to have the .dlls, to have the resource files, or even as a fallback to more efficient operation. In Safe Mode, there is no such thing as a Classic mode because the WDDM driver architecture so vastly efficient over 7, there's no point in making Safe Mode to run the Classic theme.

Also, aesthetics. If you have noticed, the Xbox platform, Windows Phone, Bing, Outlook.com, Windows and everything else Microsoft is ditching the old Aero styling or xp era styling of gaudy push buttons and faux lighting and faux textures in lieu of modernist Bauhaus inspired design. Having Aero transparency or even Aero styling as an option in Windows 9 kind of throws a shiny, gradient drop shadowed wrench at that. They want to push a unified aesthetic that is digital and modern versus pushing your GPU just to show some eye candy. And continuing on that note, the target devices that will run Windows 9, like anything battery operated, needs to run as efficiently as possible. An example of that working is the HTC One M8 with Windows versus android. When the HTC One uses Windows Phone, the battery life lasts three hours longer than using android, a platform that pushes eye candy and everything opposite Windows Phone and more Windows vista.

Opinions and preferences are nice and all, we'd all love as many options as we'd like, but a line has to be drawn. Better efficiency and battery life trump pushing the GPU to just simply display the UI of the platform. And personally, I'd rather have an efficient desktop system than one using more power than necessary just to run the OS. I'd rather dedicated the remainder for Photoshop CC and GTA IV (YAY!) and other processor hungry programs.

But that's just me. *Cool

 

Well, if it does ever come down to where they have to choose between one format or the other, based on user preferences, I don't think you'd be very happy. Despite the fact that you seem to believe smarter and more advanced than most, based on your comments, the modern design has not been accepted by the vast majority, and for them to continue as a viable entity they will have to come to terms with that one simple salient fact.