Avalon Beta

[Inane_Dork]

Neat looking I guess, but why would I want something like this?

Nothing against you at all, please understand. It just seems that things like this cause people to ask why of MS, but if Apple were to do it, they'd ask why MS didn't have it already.

It's a nice optional (I hope) addition like Apple's windows slurping in and out of the taskbar. Neither really adds anything, but if you can do it, why not?

 

[Fox5]

Neat looking I guess, but why would I want something like this?

Nothing against you at all, please understand. It just seems that things like this cause people to ask why of MS, but if Apple were to do it, they'd ask why MS didn't have it already.

It's a nice optional (I hope) addition like Apple's windows slurping in and out of the taskbar. Neither really adds anything, but if you can do it, why not?

Well, it could make the computer run slower or take more memory.
People disable the visual enhancements in windows xp to get extra performance, so there will be people that will definetely consider this too bloated, and I doubt all those people with 1ghz celeron computers will run avalon well. Or will avalon even run on 5 year old dells? Eh, not a problem anyhow, I've never known anyone with a prebuilt pc who's bought a windows upgrade, they don't upgrade the OS until they get a new PC with it.

 

[Inane_Dork]

People disable the visual enhancements in windows xp to get extra performance, so there will be people that will definetely consider this too bloated...

Oh, I agree. And there will be people who hate it and there will be people who can't really even work with it. All reasons why I hope it's optional (it really should be). But that's no reason to abandon the feature altogether.

 

[Dave Baumann]

Like Jaguar on OSX it has the potential to do the opposite as well - by using more of the functionality of the 3D device it can reduce some workload on the CPU as well.

 

[vb]

A good article about it at arstechnica

 

[Geo]

People disable the visual enhancements in windows xp to get extra performance, so there will be people that will definetely consider this too bloated...

Oh, I agree. And there will be people who hate it and there will be people who can't really even work with it. All reasons why I hope it's optional (it really should be). But that's no reason to abandon the feature altogether.

So far as I can recall, every major UI shift from MS on Windows has been optional, or at least if not able to turn it off entirely, you're able to start the old UI and use it instead. The tradition is there, so I'd think they'd continue it this time.

I'm remembering how long it took to wean my wife from File Manager and Program Groups when we switched to Win95. I think the final break was when we went to Win98!

 

[wireframe]

So far as I can recall, every major UI shift from MS on Windows has been optional, or at least if not able to turn it off entirely, you're able to start the old UI and use it instead. The tradition is there, so I'd think they'd continue it this time.

I'm remembering how long it took to wean my wife from File Manager and Program Groups when we switched to Win95. I think the final break was when we went to Win98!

Ahhhh...remember when Windows was optional? (c:>win.exe) Those were the days...

Actually, I wish good ol' MS would make a break with legacy/compatibility and make some things mandatory. The overhead of having options is bad for performance, security, and, in many ways, the user (not to mention those who must support the users).

It will be interesting to see what impact GPUs will have on the "Windows experience" in terms of performance. Upgrade your video adapter to browse files faster? Another factor will be the 2D/3D modes on modern GPUs. I suppose you will always be in 3D mode and the fans will be on high. Nothing against that in theory. I like the idea of specialized components doing what they do best. However, it might be a stumbling block with certain hardware. For example, from what I gather, I would not want to listen to a FX 5800 Ultra at full throttle while browsing the Web.

 

[Dave Baumann]

As far as interface support goes MS were initially pegging a mode at DX7 hardware and then the higher modes at DX9, now though they have dropped the DX7 mode and you either have the old Windows 2000 interface for non-capable hardware or the 3D interface for capable DX9 hardare. At the moment I believe it is split into three levels (Aero, Aero Glass and "Diamond" has recently cropped up) depending on the capabilities and performance of your graphics and system.

In terms of how the 3D IHV's take this, things are going to ave to get much better much quicker. IMO, the mobile performance/power management side of things will be pressed into service in a much more serious manner on the desktop and even then they are going to have to put some work in. It wouldn't surpise me if we begin to see much more dynamic load based clock throttling.

 

[Kombatant]

Well, it could make the computer run slower or take more memory

Well, that would be the case if those effects were traditional CPU-accelerated effects (load up Stardock's WindowFX and Task Manager to get an idea of what I am talking about). But they are not; they are accelerated from the gfx card. Meaning that (as an older video of Avalon demonstrated) you can have complex window effects on screen, with CPU utilisation hovering over 0%.

 

[karlotta]

And with my AMD64 rig or my old P4 3.0, i cant even use the CPU power i have. This will be no problem with my setups and next machines. I gusee if you pair a DX9 card (real one) with a old XP1800, you will ssuck at this... Soo upgrade.