Windows 8 / Metro ?

To me it looks like Microsoft is making a major strategy shift.

http://www.i-programmer.info/news/12...pers-take.html

Windows 8 is split into two. There's the Desktop with all the "old" familiar technologies such as Win32 and .NET. And then there's the Metro which is based on a brand new native API called WinRT, an object oriented C++ interface. The Desktop isn't going to be developed any further, only maintained. All new developments will go into Metro.

To me this is truely amazing. That Win32 would need to go at some point is maybe natural but .NET, that's a big surprise. Just a few years ago .NET and managed code was the future and would replace native developments eventually. Microsoft even put C++ on hold. But now native C++ is back big time, at least that's what it looks like to me.

What do you make of all this?

Quote:

---

What do you make of all this?

---

I'm happier than ever that I no longer use Windows. Microsoft sure has made it clear that they want to push Metro hard, but I've never seen any definitive statement that they have ceased all development for "traditional" applications. If that is the case, then maybe others will put Windows behind them as well.

I'd really like to see applications like Photoshop, Visual Studio and Excel as "immersive" applications. To me, that would be the most counter productive thing in the world. There is a reason we moved away from one full screen application at a time (DOS) and moved to multiple scalable, movable applications on screen at the same time (Windows).

The whole point of Metro is to be tablet centric. Those applications may be easier to use on a tablet computer, but they'll suck on a desktop. There is a similar problem on Linux too. Gnome, one of the most popular desktop managers available has gone 100% tablet centric with their next version (Gnome 3) as well.

I'm hoping that this obsession with tablets is just a 2011 fad that will die off soon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_F

I'm hoping that this obsession with tablets is just a 2011 fad that will die off soon.

---

agreed ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_F

[...]as "immersive" applications. To me, that would be the most counter productive thing in the world. There is a reason we moved away from one full screen application at a time (DOS) and moved to multiple scalable, movable applications on screen at the same time (Windows).

---

totally agreed ... :(

IMO, something at the same time amazing and horrible happened in the last few years: more and more people with near-zero-computer-knowledge is using computers pervasively in their everyday lives; no more just as a hidden experts/enthusiasts driven backbone of modern society as happened in the late 20th century, but as a set of fundamental tools for social relationships and activities at all levels.

this is obviously a good thing, but had the side effect of pushing the industry to invest on things like touch screen phones, tablets and other "social" products, that are simply not designed to be "productive", at least not as productive as they could be given the complexity of the hardware/software they are based on. They are optimized to be usable by the most number of people, not to be the most useful, eventually only to a niche of power users ...
... this seems the perfect recipe for mediocrity.

now, if the Microsoft choice goes in the direction of providing a common platform for both dumb-users and computer-savvy-users then, after all, I think it's an acceptable choice. We'll see ...

speaking of WinRT,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

The Desktop isn't going to be developed any further, only maintained. All new developments will go into Metro.

---

do you have any reference to support this claim ? as far as I understood, winRT is not limited to metro style applications, it can be used as a full replacement of win32 to code usual window-like programs as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superbonzo

do you have any reference to support this claim ? as far as I understood, winRT is not limited to metro style applications, it can be used as a full replacement of win32 to code usual window-like programs as well.

---

I don't have any references, but I doubt WinRT would be useful for traditional applications, since no doubt the GUI facilities are a key part of the API.

The other thing which I just recently found out, is that WinRT isn't really going to be a C++ API. It's going to be made using a technique similar to COM, and will make use of a proprietary extension to the language called C++/CX, which looks similar to C++/CLI. It adds ref new to the language, a version of new for refrence counted WinRT objects, and it adds ^ (carrot) pointer notation, for reference counted WinRT objects.

Not particularly hot on the idea of proprietary extensions to the C++ language. I didn't mind C++/CLI so much, because it had it's own obscure uses, but now they are actually encouraging everyone to use this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superbonzo

do you have any reference to support this claim ? as far as I understood, winRT is not limited to metro style applications, it can be used as a full replacement of win32 to code usual window-like programs as well.

---

Sure, the link I supplied in my first post. Here Desktop (with a capital D) represents the old traditional Windows technologies. It's contrasted with Metro which represents the new WinRT based technologies.

According to the reference, Desktop is doomed to slowly fade away and eventually be replaced by Metro. But this doesn't necessarily mean you cannot build desktop applications similar to those we see today within the Metro framework. This doesn't seem to be Microsoft's intention though, at least not initially, since Metro applications are full-screen only.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris_F

Not particularly hot on the idea of proprietary extensions to the C++ language. I didn't mind C++/CLI so much, because it had it's own obscure uses, but now they are actually encouraging everyone to use this.

---

Neither am I. I had hoped for a clean C++ interface.

http://mariusbancila.ro/blog/2011/09...ndows-runtime/

On the other hand also Qt uses a C++ language extension but the impact of C++/RT will of course be much greater. Many programmers won't be aware of that they're using a Microsoft dialect of C++ also when not dealing directly with WinRT.

I say bring it on. No problem learning another framework or technology.

I've got about 20 more years in this business, so I'll need to stay current with the latest Microsoft technologies since that is where I focus.

I suppose the guys still using VC6 might be in for a bit of trouble. ;)

I don't think it's that scary as it seems at first. They've just taken all the relatively new, modern technology directions exemplified by the .NET library (like XAML), and put the performance considerations in the equation, and built a new abstraction layer on top of the OS for devs to use. I don't see how that is going to take away from anyone. It's just another tool in the box, and all tools are only good for certain kinds of jobs.

The way I see it, WinRT will be initially mainly used for the more "casual" apps, while business-oriented applications will still be developed in the traditional way - until one day someone comes up with an innovative solution to do them Metro-style.
I don't see the fact that they are full screen apps to be particularly problematic - it's just a matter of the current mindset. Aren't we forgetting something? All these windows floating around on our desktops are not really individual objects - as the abstraction of the window tries to convince us - under the hood, there is just one screen, and the OS is doing all the region checking, all the mouse tracking, all the painting... In essence, isn't Windows really just one big, complicated full-screen application?
Someone will eventually figure out a way to present a business-oriented Metro-style application in a way that is engaging and productivity-boosting.

Besides, from what I've heard - you C++ guys appear to have the most reasons for celebration - assuming you happen to get to work on a Metro-style app project in the future.

As for how are they going to integrate WinRT with different languages: they mentioned that WinRT includes a unified type system, that is "projected into these languages". I guess it will probably be exposed to the supported languages through APIs, just like everything else, and maybe covered up by some syntactic sugar, and aided with language infrastructure where possible. They say that WinRT is very thin, and highly optimized, so I also guess that's the main reason this all is possible.

Check out this video; but beware, the speaker is a bit overenthusiastic. :D
Edit: Oh, yeah, you can skip the first few minutes - just jump to the talk.

Final thought:
Wait a sec...
Windows 8 will be... without windows?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

I don't see the fact that they are full screen apps to be particularly problematic - it's just a matter of the current mindset.

---

patterns of user interaction are not simply a mindset matter, they depends on both the physical way the user interacts with the mechanical interfaces and the specific content of the tasks he's supposed to do, in a coordinated way. Each user/tasks pair has it's own optimal interaction pattern, and, you know, given that the consumer market is mostly made of users with the same number of legs/arms/hands/cognitive-sensory abilities/etc.. it's an acceptable approximation saying that each (set of coordinated)task has its own optimal interface.
So, it's reasonable to claim that windows based applications that have proven productive will remain windows based in the future as well, in the same way certain command line programs have remained command line till these days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

Aren't we forgetting something? All these windows floating around on our desktops are not really individual objects - as the abstraction of the window tries to convince us - under the hood, there is just one screen, and the OS is doing all the region checking, all the mouse tracking, all the painting... In essence, isn't Windows really just one big, complicated full-screen application?

---

well, the same thing could be said about any physical body, you know Magritte's Ceci n'est pas une pipe, don't you ? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

Besides, from what I've heard - you C++ guys appear to have the most reasons for celebration - assuming you happen to get to work on a Metro-style app project in the future.

As for how are they going to integrate WinRT with different languages: they mentioned that WinRT includes a unified type system, that is "projected into these languages". I guess it will probably be exposed to the supported languages through APIs, just like everything else, and maybe covered up by some syntactic sugar, and aided with language infrastructure where possible. They say that WinRT is very thin, and highly optimized, so I also guess that's the main reason this all is possible.

---

yes, from a C++ programmer POV, winRT seems very good, although I've not yet seen any code, for example, to see how XAML code behind should work in C++ ( does anybody have any reference ? ). Also, an easy to use common ABI is very intriguing ...

regarding the fact they introduced a c++ dialect it's not that bad too, because, contrary to c++/CLR, one can always segregate the Microsoft-ish c++ parts at the design level through simple incapsulation, if needed.

the only fear I have about the current industry trends is from a user POV: as I said in my previous post, the consumer-oriented industry seems moving from usefulness-bound products to usability-bound products. Just take a tablet and a desktop workstation; if one compares productivity ( the absolute value of what someone can create with it, measured in some reasonable way ) then the latter beats the former hands down.

now, what's scares me is the effect this could have on the consumer market as a whole; more specifically, the effect on the development speeed and consumer prices of those IT goods that happen to be very useful to some but not necesserely usable by most consumers ... well, let's be optimistic ! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arjay

I suppose the guys still using VC6 might be in for a bit of trouble. ;)

---

Well, I'm still using VC6 sometimes (especially to quickly find answers for the VC forums) but don't feel in trouble at all. :)
I see WinRT as a new exciting tam-tam-toy and not as a possible replacement for the real native WinAPI (except for tablets, smartphones and other little cute gadgets).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superbonzo

patterns of user interaction are not simply a mindset matter, they depends on both the physical way the user interacts with the mechanical interfaces and the specific content of the tasks he's supposed to do, in a coordinated way. Each user/tasks pair has it's own optimal interaction pattern, and, you know, given that the consumer market is mostly made of users with the same number of legs/arms/hands/cognitive-sensory abilities/etc.. it's an acceptable approximation saying that each (set of coordinated)task has its own optimal interface.
So, it's reasonable to claim that windows based applications that have proven productive will remain windows based in the future as well, in the same way certain command line programs have remained command line till these days.

---

Exactly the kind of mindset shift I'm talking about: you are, of course, right - window-based UI systems have been there for a long time, and we are all, as users, familiar with them, which is a big advantage, and the industry experience allowed us to develop ways to provide the optimal user experience - in that system. However, the change is here (in software business, it seems it always is)... Let's hit it and see what we can do. Before, we didn't have much alternative, but now we have room to experiment. Window-based approach might provide pretty optimized user experience, but it doesn't mean it's the only approach possible. Maybe we can find a way to be super-productive with Metro-style apps, wh just don't quite know how yet.
Or it could turn out to be a dead end in that department.

Quote:

---

well, the same thing could be said about any physical body, you know Magritte's Ceci n'est pas une pipe, don't you ? ;)

---

Nope, it's not a pipe :D
http://erikbuys.files.wordpress.com/...pg?w=300&h=207
EDIT: Hm... what the h3ll happened with the img tags? And where is the insert image button???

However, you're taking the analogy too far. I'm just saying that underneath the abstraction, it's actually something else, an underlying complexity that the abstraction shields us form - in the same way that TCP provides "reliable" transfer although it's built upon an unreliable system, by implementing certain behavior under the hood.
Take games - these are full screen applications, that have toyed with all kinds of user interfaces applicable in their domain. Including windows - in a full screen app.
It is not impossible that people will eventually develop UI libraries that are applicable to the new system, possibly using a hybrid approach.


EDIT: Oh, yeah - it's a little silly how Microsoft insists on the full screen approach... In the video, they show how a call to MessageBox fails to compile... Like it's a big deal if a message box pops up... No, you have to do it the new way! Probably some text flashes somewhere, or an semitransparent animated pane rolls in carrying the message or something. Like there's a fundamental difference between a window and an semitransparent rectangle...

Quote:

---

yes, from a C++ programmer POV, winRT seems very good, although I've not yet seen any code, for example, to see how XAML code behind should work in C++ ( does anybody have any reference ? ). Also, an easy to use common ABI is very intriguing ...

---

The in the video I linked to in my previous post, they write a small Metro-style app in C++, using XAML for the presentation layer. MS seems to have taken the it-just-works approach, where XAML is supported on the level of WinRT itself. The interesting thing is, you can take XAML from your C++ Metro-app and just paste it in a C# Metro-app, and there will be no problem whatsoever. Heck, it appears that you can paste it in a regular .NET WPF app, since they say its standard XAML.
As for the architecture, it really seems they've taken some of the ideas and concepts developed for the .NET and made it happen for native code.

Quote:

---

the only fear I have about the current industry trends is from a user POV: as I said in my previous post, the consumer-oriented industry seems moving from usefulness-bound products to usability-bound products. Just take a tablet and a desktop workstation; if one compares productivity ( the absolute value of what someone can create with it, measured in some reasonable way ) then the latter beats the former hands down.

now, what's scares me is the effect this could have on the consumer market as a whole; more specifically, the effect on the development speeed and consumer prices of those IT goods that happen to be very useful to some but not necesserely usable by most consumers ... well, let's be optimistic ! :)

---

Maybe we'll have a cleaner separation to probably more numerous "casual developers" that never heard of a register, and less numerous "hardcore developers" that can do the job done when it truly matters. After all, aren't those guys that use these productivity-oriented applications making money for some other people... People who want they employees productive.
See? You C++ devs might even end up getting a raise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

I don't see the fact that they are full screen apps to be particularly problematic - it's just a matter of the current mindset.

---

And what was wrong with the monochrome computer screen really?

If it weren't for the current mindset I'm sure people would abandon color right away for the much more unproblematic black and white user experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

Window-based approach might provide pretty optimized user experience, but it doesn't mean it's the only approach possible. Maybe we can find a way to be super-productive with Metro-style apps, wh just don't quite know how yet.

---

is it possible to use a monkey as a screwdriver ? yes, it is, maybe one day in the future someone will think out how to use a monkey like that ... but, the point is: can we reasonably say that consumers won't use monkeys for anything but making funny examples about monkeys ? [answer: yes] in the unreasonable event that someone uses a monkey in a non trivial way, can we reasonably say that there are better ways of doing the same thing ? [answer: yes] :D

I'm not simply claiming that a user interaction pattern gets used just because of its being "familiar", I'm claiming that user interaction can be bound by both "the interacting interface" ( eg. the machanical interface + software ) and by the "human interface" ( his fingers/hands/arms/ his language/etc... ) and that being the human interface constant ( cyborgs and politicians excluded :) ) those interfacing technologies proven successful for such a long time reasonably belong to the latter category. That is, if you want them to change you have to change the task not the user mindset.

Consider the keyboard: (most) humans will plausibly continue thinking and communicating knowledge through alphabetic words; this means that any non trivial knowledge dependent task performed on a computer will require a text input interface;
now, we have two hands and ten fingers; in theory, it's (3+3)*10 degrees of freedom (of the finger tips); the more of those DOF you use the more coordinated the motion of the finger tips must be, that is, for each "packet" of action peformed by a finger the interacting device must perform a consistent feedback "packet" in the least time; now, the fastest sensory-motor pathways in the human nervous system involving relatively simple coordinated motion of body parts happens at very early cortical stages;
that is, the human nervous system being constant, no visually based touch screen per character input system can beat a mechanical device in speed, such as a keyboard, ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

Maybe we'll have a cleaner separation to probably more numerous "casual developers" that never heard of a register, and less numerous "hardcore developers" that can do the job done when it truly matters. After all, aren't those guys that use these productivity-oriented applications making money for some other people... People who want they employees productive.
See? You C++ devs might even end up getting a raise.

---

well, I was not reffering to devolopers, just the effetcs of the current trends on me as a "consumer"; consider again the keyboard, just try comparing the keyboards coming with desktop PCs of ~5 years ago and those supplyed nowadays, the latter being those flatty things with nearly no mechanical feedback ... now, imagine this effect on a larger scale ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

The in the video I linked to in my previous post, they write a small Metro-style app in C++, using XAML for the presentation layer.

---

uhm, for some reason I cannot see that video ... I'll try again later ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

And what was wrong with the monochrome computer screen really?

If it weren't for the current mindset I'm sure people would abandon color right away for the much more unproblematic black and white user experience.

---

Wrong analogy.
Aside from that, how is color problematic for users? (save a few that like to lead their lives retro-style... Hm... rhymes with Metro-style. lol)
The following analogy is flawed, too, but here's one from a developer's perspective: It's more like 3D movies vs 2d movies - a lot of people hate 3D, mostly because directors tend to misuse the feature. My point is, if you're gonna develop Metro-style apps, you're gonna have to reconsider the old ways, and try out a thing or two until you find an approach that works.

Besides that, where have I said that windows-based apps will go away? I'm just saying that it is not impossible that new kind of workflows my arise, now that there is room for experimentation. There are things that developers can do to make up for the lack of windows in Metro-style apps - and I'm not talking about emulating windows, but about coming up with ways to switch between tasks, or things like simultaneously looking at a reference of some sort while you work on something - and there is a possibility that the alternate approach turns out to be equally good.
Maybe not, we'll just have to wait and see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superbonzo

is it possible to use a monkey as a screwdriver ? yes, it is, maybe one day in the future someone will think out how to use a monkey like that ... but, the point is: can we reasonably say that consumers won't use monkeys for anything but making funny examples about monkeys ? [answer: yes] in the unreasonable event that someone uses a monkey in a non trivial way, can we reasonably say that there are better ways of doing the same thing ? [answer: yes] :D

---

Wrong analogy: (monkey-screwdriver distance) >> (MetroApp-winApp distance). :)
(Just so that there's no confusion, the '>>' is the math symbol for "much greater than" - and, just so that there's no confusion, I know you know that, I just didn't want you to read it as right shift or something :P)

You're assuming that it's highly unlikely that Metro-style apps can be used in that particular way; I'm arguing that it's not - but that we won't really know until someone actually tries it.
Maybe you're right, however, your Metro-monkey is already there - so why not see what it can do with screws.

Quote:

---

I'm not simply claiming that a user interaction pattern gets used just because of its being "familiar"

---

But you can't deny that familiarity plays an important role: every time you find the Cancel button on the wrong side, it slows you down. Ever happened to you that, after using a bunch of apps that have OK/Cancel arranged one way, there comes this one app that has them switched, and after doing some edits you lose all your work simply because you assumed that the OK button would be at a certain place...

Quote:

---

I'm claiming that user interaction can be bound by both "the interacting interface" ( eg. the machanical interface + software ) and by the "human interface" ( his fingers/hands/arms/ his language/etc... ) and that being the human interface constant ( cyborgs and politicians excluded :) ) those interfacing technologies proven successful for such a long time reasonably belong to the latter category. That is, if you want them to change you have to change the task not the user mindset.

---

Yes, but it's a layered system: there's the human interface, then there's the hardware interface, then there's the software interface. And although they impose certain constraints on each other, the very fact that there's this kind of layering makes it possible to vary one layer to some extent. What I'm claiming is that Metro-style apps are still withing those bounds - but, again, we will have to wait and see.

Quote:

---

Consider the keyboard: [...]
that is, the human nervous system being constant, no visually based touch screen per character input system can beat a mechanical device in speed, such as a keyboard, ever.

---

I don't think that the keyboard is jeopardized by Metro. If it is, then MS people have been eating some funky mushrooms...

Quote:

---

well, I was not reffering to devolopers, just the effetcs of the current trends on me as a "consumer"; consider again the keyboard, just try comparing the keyboards coming with desktop PCs of ~5 years ago and those supplyed nowadays, the latter being those flatty things with nearly no mechanical feedback ... now, imagine this effect on a larger scale ...

---

Processing...
Imagining...
Reacting...
"Noooooooooooooooooooooo!"


:lol:
Maybe that is what is happening... But I doubt it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

But you can't deny that familiarity plays an important role

---

agreed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

I don't think that the keyboard is jeopardized by Metro. If it is, then MS people have been eating some funky mushrooms...

---

I didn't mean so, it was just an example showing a user interface technology that simply cannot be any better, because bound to limitations of humans and not of computers/softwares. You can't plausibly say << maybe, in the future someone will invent a faster way of inputting text >>, unless humans are phisically modified somehow, or a radically different non-mechanical interaction method is developed ( like mind reading or the like ).

That said, I cannot claim with certainty that window based interaction shares the same level of optimality, I simply said that it's plausible ( == if I had to bet I'd say so ) because

1) windows have been successfully used in productive contexts for very long time
2) many alternatives to windows have been developed over the years and even decades; touch/voice/gesture/etc... based interfaces have been tested many times in the past and none of them emerged as means of enhancing productivity in knowledge dependent contexts
3) the origin of the recent adoption of touch based interfaces is explainable in terms of a new emerging market of non-productive consumers, rather then in terms of truly novel interaction schemes

anyway, let's wait and see then ! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

Maybe that is what is happening... But I doubt it.

---

<<I hope so ... I hope so>> he said quietly, while touch typing on his good'ol keyboard ... :D

[beyond the topic]

Imagine the following dialog:

Quote:

---

Programmer: Computer, please write a program according to REQ64123.
Tablet: What is REQ64123?
Programmer: Take it from The Cloud, stupid bunch of bytes!

After a while:
Programmer: Helloooooou!... Haven't you compiled yet?
Tablet: Sorry, Sir, it gives me a bunch of errors!.. My fault, I need a break. Please touch the red icon on my screen! Gently... pleeeeease!...

---

:)

Well, for working/programming prefer a classic desktop computer, having a classic display (non-touchscreen) which is showing classic overlapped windows, and having a classic keyboard which does a classic "click!" when you hit a key. And of course, a classic mouse.
Is this just old fashion? I think it's not, at least for the moment. ;)

I find this blog very enlightning,

http://dougseven.com/2011/09/15/a-ba...g-discussions/

It seems WinRT doesn't mean Windows Retro Technology as I initially thought. Desktop applications will prevail for the forseeable future. Only when Visual C++ itself becomes a Metro application is there a reason to reconsider. Metro simply is a way of positioning Windows as a viable alternative for gadget computing like tablets.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

I find this blog very enlightning,

http://dougseven.com/2011/09/15/a-ba...g-discussions/

---

At least Win32 is in the right place, even in the original "boxologic" diagram.

http://www.codexpert.ro/forum/download/file.php?id=585

So again: Don't panic, Windows API is still there!.. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

I find this blog very enlightning,

http://dougseven.com/2011/09/15/a-ba...g-discussions/

It seems WinRT doesn't mean Windows Retro Technology as I initially thought.

---

Ta da! :)

Anyway, some of that stuff was mentioned in that hour long, somewhat overenthusiastic presentation video I linked to. Speaking of which, they mentioned that when you switch Metro-style apps, the inactive ones go into a state of hibernation of some sort (whatever they mean by that)... Last night, after having to wait for a counter to download something, and a browser/web-page glitch that caused it not to update while I'm not looking at the d4mn thing (killing time on some other tab instead), I'm not sure I like the approach... Unless the picture more complicated than that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

Desktop applications will prevail for the forseeable future. Only when Visual C++ itself becomes a Metro application is there a reason to reconsider. Metro simply is a way of positioning Windows as a viable alternative for gadget computing like tablets.

---

I agree. I was simply saying that now we have a new exploration space, so new and interesting things may appear in that foreseeable future.

P.S. Same blog, new post - where we are now with Metro: There is a need for only five Metro style apps in the world.

For somebody who realy wants to see what's inside Windows 8 / Metro / WinRT, I would like to recommend to download, install (on a virtual machine) and test Windows 8 Developer Preview.

// the rest related in the net is for the moment noise, impression, religion, talk, talk and talk... ;)

I thought you guys might wanna give these a look:
Under the Covers of WinRT Using C++
Design Details of the Windows Runtime [not too in-depth, and not C++ - oriented, but still...]

EDIT:
Aaaand check this short video out - showcases Windows 8 Metro-style UI; you can see that although there are no classic windows, there are various "boxes" - that pop up, or are docked; you can also see how you can look at two apps simultaneously (yeah, they are full screen but not full - full screen...), and how will the old style apps work and look like, and how you can simultaneously work with a classic windowed app, and a Metro-style app.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ovidiucucu

For somebody who realy wants to see what's inside Windows 8 / Metro / WinRT, I would like to recommend to download, install (on a virtual machine) and test Windows 8 Developer Preview.

---

ovidiucucu, did you try this? I thought about this, but I see two problems: Win8 Virtual machine support and missing multitouch screen or emulation. What virtual computer did you use for Win8 image? Is there something interesting to try without multitouch screen?

I used Oracle VM VirtualBox on Windows 7 64-bit host.
Because I have a classic desktop with a classic display, I'm still using a classic mouse instead touching the screen with the fingers. :)

Of course, may be interesting to see yourself what Windows 8 / Metro / WinRT really is, much more interesting than looking at "boxologic" schemas and/or reading whatever weblogs. ;)

[ Later edit ]
Windows 8 Developer Preview with developer tools English, 64-bit (x64) includes Visual Studio 11 Express, which allow you to play and enjoy with WinRT.
And why not?.. become a Metro-pioneer. :)

I don't have multi-touch screen (though I think to buy it). There is multi-touch screen emulation, available for Windows 7, but it doesn't work, of course, inside of virtual computer. So, I am curious, did you find something interesting to learn in Win8/Metro/WinRT, having only classic mouse-keyboard support? Doesn't it look like trying Windows having only command line interface?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex F

[...]
So, I am curious, did you find something interesting to learn in Win8/Metro/WinRT, having only classic mouse-keyboard support? Doesn't it look like trying Windows having only command line interface?

---

Somehow but not exactly, even Metro still has a GUI... :D

Anyway, I hope the release will have at least three main editions, as follows:

1. Windows 8 Immersive (Metro only) - for marketeers, managers and secretaries.
2. Windows 8 Business (Desktop only) - for serious hardworking applications.
3. Windows 8 Ultimate (both Metro and Desktop) - for developers and hobbies like us. :)

[ Later Edit ]
Of course, Visual Studio 11 isn't Metro-style application. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

To me it looks like Microsoft is making a major strategy shift.

http://www.i-programmer.info/news/12...pers-take.html

Windows 8 is split into two. There's the Desktop with all the "old" familiar technologies such as Win32 and .NET. And then there's the Metro which is based on a brand new native API called WinRT, an object oriented C++ interface. The Desktop isn't going to be developed any further, only maintained. All new developments will go into Metro.

To me this is truely amazing. That Win32 would need to go at some point is maybe natural but .NET, that's a big surprise. Just a few years ago .NET and managed code was the future and would replace native developments eventually. Microsoft even put C++ on hold. But now native C++ is back big time, at least that's what it looks like to me.

What do you make of all this?

---

I could probably make a bloat sandwich from it. lol, Microsoft should call themselves, GigaSoft, since every attempt I have seen thus far at "re-inventing" how things are done just bloats the operating system and slows it down.
I'm sure they won't disappoint on this either....
On a side note, All this frameworks stuff I have seen so far is bloated nonsense to me. COM is nonsense as well. C++ is a well refined development language, and it has stood the test of time, why do they have kept trying to replace it with garbage? to make programming simpler for beginners to learn?

let me spin off a little story, one of countless many, of MS bloat-ness at work,... my wife had a ton of duplicate pictures on her hard drive from using Microsoft picture import feature, and she never remembered to delete the pictures from her camera, so I threw my little dupfinder app on her PC to get rid of the dups, but none were found, I found this odd, upon research, I discovered Microsoft is inserting a XML file into EVERY PICTURE she copied of the camera, I calculated there was about half a gig of garbage XML data inside of all her pictures because of this! Data not even needed, such as the date she copied off the camera, website links to the revision of XML they are using, ect. So I had to write a program to correctly detect all the duplicates, ignoring this BS data,... still on the todo list is to rip all the bloated junk data they inserted into the pictures, back out of the pictures. No wonder their import feature is MUCH slower than just copying directly from the SD card, they have to bloat up all your pictures files with junk XML stuff first, thanks MS ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 12oclocker

I could probably make a bloat sandwich from it. lol, Microsoft should call themselves, GigaSoft, since every attempt I have seen thus far at "re-inventing" how things are done just bloats the operating system and slows it down.
I'm sure they won't disappoint on this either....
On a side note, All this frameworks stuff I have seen so far is bloated nonsense to me. COM is nonsense as well. C++ is a well refined development language, and it has stood the test of time, why do they have kept trying to replace it with garbage? to make programming simpler for beginners to learn?

---

Do you want a TRS-80? I still have one, lying down in some cellar. And I can guarantee that it's entirely unbloated. What could you bloat within the 16 kB of RAM in the most popular variety or the 12kB of ROM? (Note that nowadays application icon files are at least about the total RAM size of the TRS-80. Would you call that bloat?) Or do you want a C64? The fact that the TRS-80's Level 2 BASIC originally is from Microsoft is relatively well-known, yet the fact that they made the C64 BASIC as well is not. Perhaps they weren't too proud of that?

The point is: Don't forget where the name Microsoft comes from. It originates more than three decades ago and the notion of "bloat" these days was different from what it is now. While 30+ years ago what nowadays is a single app's icon image would have instantly exhausted the total RAM capacity of a contemporary machine, it's way in the "don't care" range now. Even my (outdated) mobile phone has more memory by magnitudes than the "computers" from three decades ago.

Get the point? It's all a matter of time frame.

Quote:

---

let me spin off a little story, one of countless many, of MS bloat-ness at work,... my wife had a ton of duplicate pictures on her hard drive from using Microsoft picture import feature, and she never remembered to delete the pictures from her camera, so I threw my little dupfinder app on her PC to get rid of the dups, but none were found, I found this odd, upon research, I discovered Microsoft is inserting a XML file into EVERY PICTURE she copied of the camera, I calculated there was about half a gig of garbage XML data inside of all her pictures because of this! Data not even needed, such as the date she copied off the camera, website links to the revision of XML they are using, ect. So I had to write a program to correctly detect all the duplicates, ignoring this BS data,... still on the todo list is to rip all the bloated junk data they inserted into the pictures, back out of the pictures. No wonder their import feature is MUCH slower than just copying directly from the SD card, they have to bloat up all your pictures files with junk XML stuff first, thanks MS ;-)

---

To sum up all the lines above: Why worry? The "half a gig" of wasted space you complain about would be no more than 0.2&#37; of the capacity of my own outdated hard drive. So what!? :confused:

Both storage and processing requirements need to be considered in their respective time frames. Konrad Zuse's brain would certainly have instantly exploded when he realized that my (outdated!) Motorola V3 mobile has, by magnitudes, more memory and processing power than the mainframs of the 60's and 70's!

And as to the dupfinding: I'm always slightly annoyed by the fact that Unison always copies my Excel files to the backup if only I opened instead of modifying them. But then again, who cares!? That's less than 1% of my overall backup volume. You may be really concerned about that if you were the author of Unison (or Excel), but most probably you are not. And the culprit of that Excel File mess-up certainly is MS (yes, now they actually are), yet I don't really care since it doesn't really waste a significat amount of my time or storage capacity.

The stories about bloated MS programs are always funny and always correct. The problem is that this is not related to the topic discussed here :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 12oclocker

On a side note, All this frameworks stuff I have seen so far is bloated nonsense to me. COM is nonsense as well. C++ is a well refined development language, and it has stood the test of time, why do they have kept trying to replace it with garbage? to make programming simpler for beginners to learn?

---

BTW, COM is neither a framework nor a language extension; it serves a specific purpose ( defining a powerful ABI for components ) that stays on top of the C++ ( or even C ) language with a fair design; where's the bloat in COM ? :confused: it seems you don't understand what COM is and what's used for ... saying that we don't need COM because "C++ is a well refined development language" is like saying that we don't need bananas because we have pandas ... now, this is nonsense :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 12oclocker

to make programming simpler for beginners to learn?

---

Beginners are significantly more likely to mess up with higher level technologies, so, I don't think they are made for them...

I disagree. A high level language should make it easier to write code since it abstracts away hardware dependency which abstracts away concepts related to hardware. For example, who aligns machine code to cache lines? It also offers a better logical understanding than low level languages( assembly ). The .net languages are much easier compared to writing in assembly and a lot easier to debug. I view c++ as a middle level language even though that isn't really true since it is a high level language, but c++ isn't as safe as other higher level languages( garbage collection, removal of pointers ) nor does it have a default application framework.

Beginners can mess up in high level languages, but not so badly compared to a low level approach where you begin with almost nothing to help you and your tools aren't bundled up so nicely :)

Also there are some high level assembly languages, but I wouldn't really call them high level compared to c#.

The only bloat I am afraid of is where it stalls my computer for no good reason. It does seem if computers get faster, programs get slower every time. Consider how fast vb6 starts up and how much memory is used compared to vs2010. Even though I have a fairly good computer, I like to keep bottlenecks down. There are exceptions like firefox which is deadly with memory, but I couldn't live without it.

Sorry for aiding in being off topic :lol:

I meant that they are more likely to mess up as opposed to the more experienced devs, not with respect to lower level technologies - precisely because beginners often don't have the slightest idea about what's going on under the hood, and as soon as they try to do something more than what they found in an intro book or a tutorial, and run into trouble, they will be completely lost. Because, given the "right approach", all abstractions are leaky.

Furthermore, to understand abstractions you have to focus on the concepts they introduce, while, in my experience, beginners often get lost in the details, failing to see the big picture.
Also, they often have yet to develop the ability of abstract thinking, so even understanding something as important as OOP can be a problem. Not to speak about design patterns, architecture, frameworks, and other stuff on which high-level development builds upon.

So, yes, I agree that a beginner is more likely to mess up in assembly then in C#, but the argument 12oclocker was making was that all this high level stuff was made so that beginners could have it easy - I'm just saying that's not the case.

EDIT:
Just realized...
"I meant that they are more likely to mess up as opposed to the more experienced devs"
Well, yeah. I guess that goes without saying...
But the point was: the purpose of abstractions is generally not to help beginners.

EDIT 2:
As for where they are more likely to mess up... Maybe someone should investigate first, before we make these kind of statements. Yes, abstractions hide hardware details, but humans have an uncanny capability to mess up anything. Understanding the fundamental concept is always a must - low level or high level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

Beginners are significantly more likely to mess up with higher level technologies, so, I don't think they are made for them...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

I meant that they are more likely to mess up as opposed to the more experienced devs, not with respect to lower level technologies

---

Well I am glad you revised your words because I really didn't read it that way the first time :). I won't argue that they are more prone to write horrible code, but at least it won't blow up so quickly. It also gives them a safer environment and they do get a jump start faster without worrying about how that window is created or worrying about memory management and etc. Sure c# wasn't designed for beginners to have a new toy as 12oclocker said, but rather to help in development of applications overall. However it does help beginners in a good way. I remember when I started using vb6 and drag and dropping controls were a no brainer. So it does help beginners and no it wasn't made just for them like 12oclocker said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eri523

Do you want a TRS-80? I still have one, lying down in some cellar. And I can guarantee that it's entirely unbloated. What could you bloat within the 16 kB of RAM in the most popular variety or the 12kB of ROM? (Note that nowadays application icon files are at leat about the total RAM size of the TRS-80. Would you call that bloat?) Or do you want a C64? The fact that the TRS-80's Level 2 BASIC originally is from Microsoft is relatively well-known, yet the fact that they made the C64 BASIC as well is not. Perhaps they weren't too proud of that?

The point is: Don't forget where the name Microsoft comes from. It originates more than three decades ago and the notion of "bloat" these days was different from what it is now. While 30+ years ago what nowadays is a single app's icon image would have instantly exhausted the total RAM capacity of a contemporary machine, it's way in the "don't care" range now. Even my (outdated) mobile phone has more memory by magnitudes than the "computers" from three decades ago.

Get the point? It's all a matter of time frame.



To sum up all the lines above: Why worry? The "half a gig" of wasted space you complain about would be no more than 0.2% of the capacity of my own outdated hard drive. So what!? :confused:

Both storage and processing requirements need to be considered in their respective time frames. Konrad Zuse's brain would certainly have instantly exploded when he realized that my (outdated!) Motorola V3 mobile has, by magnitudes, more memory and processing power than the mainframs of the 60's and 70's!

And as to the dupfinding: I'm always slightly annoyed by the fact that Unison always copies my Excel files to the backup if only I opened instead of modifying them. But then again, who cares!? That's less than 1% of my overall backup volume. You may be really concerned about that if you were the author of Unison (or Excel), but most probably you are not. And the culprit of that Excel File mess-up certainly is MS (yes, now they actually are), yet I don't really care since it doesn't really waste a significat amount of my time or storage capacity.

---

I see I upset you somehow with my opinions, no I don't want your old TRS-80, I already have one, and it's my main PC of course. thanks though, (<-kidding) I'm still not compelled by the argument, just because their is plenty of space to waste, does not mean I want the space wasted. Though I may have terabytes of harddrive space, and gigs of memory, I still like to compile my programs so they are very tiny and consume very little resources, I guess that's old-school, oh well. I have no more opinions on the subject, and leave the matter for the rest of you to argue about ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 12oclocker

I still like to compile my programs so they are very tiny and consume very little resources, I guess that's old-school, oh well.

---

This old school is still actual for embedded and real time programming, real programmer who wants to make a good job still has a lot of things to do. New technologies just give more opportunities for VB6 guys :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex F

This old school is still actual for embedded and real time programming, real programmer who wants to make a good job still has a lot of things to do. New technologies just give more opportunities for VB6 guys :)

---

Maybe that's why anything that's not small bothers me, most of my work now days is embedded system stuff, everything must be very tight, some stuff is still desktop apps, and some of which must interface with the embedded. My brother still swears by VB and says it's quicker than C++ for him, I still swear by C++ and have a collection of libraries I've written which I helps get things done quicker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 12oclocker

[...] I guess that's old-school, oh well.

---

To clarify: I'm one of those old-school guys myself. I know how to write assembly language, but actually I use that skill rather rarely nowadays since there rarely is a need to.

To condense my point into really few words: I definitely do hate unnecessary bloat as well, I just don't consider modern technologies that demand a contemporary amount of resources a bloat per se.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex F

[...] The problem is that this is not related to the topic discussed here :(

---

OMG what have I started by replying to 12oclocker's post #26! :eek: You're absolutely right. 12oclocker spotted it correctly in post #34: Yes, it did set me up to some extent, making my reply kind of an over-reaction. However, I had no idea what an avalanche of follow-ups that would kick off... :blush:

Never mind, does anybody remember now what is this question about? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex F

Never mind, does anybody remember now what is this question about? :)

---

Probably... about Windows 8 / Metro. :) ;)

@ to 12oclocker: Please keep on-topic!
If you have general issues about whatever technologies and you want to argue, a better place is General Developer Topics.
So, let us discuss here about "Windows 8 and Metro".

Thank you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex F

Never mind, does anybody remember now what is this question about? :)

---

... as in real life, the eternal battle between progress and conservation ... :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGreatCthulhu

As for where they are more likely to mess up... Maybe someone should investigate first, before we make these kind of statements.

---

I totally agree, statements about behaviors of people should always be tested against real measurements, as the risk of biases derived by projecting your own experience to others is just too high ...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joeman

So it does help beginners

---

indeed, define "help"; one thing that characterizes beginners is that they have only a vague idea of what their software should do or how it should appear/interact with the user - one thing that characterizes professional/serious programmers is that of having the strictest requirements as possible before even starting coding.

Now, it's easy to define what a "helping" technology is for serious programmers: <just> measure the time needed for and the quality of the resulting code relative to those requirements ( Eri523's reasonings about resources in contemporary hardware is an example of such relative measurements ).

But what about beginners ? no clear requirements to measure against -- you have just a bunch of code and its own enthusiast creator ...

as TheGreatCthulhu said, abstraction is not about making things easier, it is about mapping one context of thought to another context of thought;

now, if one happens to master the mapped context better than the mapped-to context then it surely will result in having being "helped by" the new abstraction;

but, as you can see, this is not a property of the abstraction per se, it's a property of a pair of abstractions relative to a human ( or better, to a human in a specified activity ).

of course, being a software abstraction a product of a community of programmers, its very reason of existence implies that there exist an audience of programmers relative to which the abstraction appears as a programming aid, but this is only a spurious side effect ...



anyway, just to stay on topic ... :)

I'm glad to see that WinRT has a relative, namely WRL, exposing the same functionality with no language extensions involved ( actually, as far I understand, WinRT should be consumable from plain COM directly, WRL just wrapping the component creation/consume process, am I right ? ).

EDIT: oops, just seen ovidiucucu reply ... I won't digress anymore :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superbonzo

as TheGreatCthulhu said, abstraction is not about making things easier, it is about mapping one context of thought to another context of thought;

---

I disagree. It is to make things easier by mapping one set of contexts to another and not to make things harder in general. I am fine with simplifying tools to make them more flexible and less ridged if suitable. Even assembly made life easier and we did need something easier than machine code and now we have c, c++, c#, perl, python, php, asp, vb, java, javascript, bash and etc. Now we have lots of languages. Some are better than the other for certain task to make that task easier. I am glad that we have an high abstraction which made building operating systems a tad bit easier, but there is always a price in trade offs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superbonzo

indeed, define "help";

---

Quote:

---

From Google search - define: help - Make it easier for (someone) to do something by offering aid.

---

I suppose abstraction is the aid in this terminology.

Again it simply makes it easier for a beginner and I am not trying to imply a language is for beginners simply because it is easier to use. It is just an effect that should occur. I am not that bias toward a language in general.

However c++ isn't really much of an help with simplification, but rather a tool with a complicated list of abstractions. Just imagine reading the std and say it is simple in any way :D Thanks to those complicated abstractions, it does make c++ a tad bit easier.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ovidiucucu

So, let us discuss here about "Windows 8 and Metro".

---

I honestly don't care about what happens with windows 8. After vista, I realized xp was way better for general use :). Then came windows 7 which was an improvement for general use and now I have window 8 to deal with and its new tablet like interface? I think I will just watch it pass by since the desktop will be just like windows 7. Only if I have no choice, but other than that, you can forget about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joeman

I honestly don't care about what happens with windows 8.

---

As an individual programmer you're free not to care of course. For example at the DOS-to-Windows paradigm shift many programmers didn't care for Windows and stubbornly stuck with DOS. Then when employment opportunities dwindled some grudgingly accepted Windows whereas others quit programming altogether and started growing magic mushrooms in Sugarcandy Mountain.

But for programmers as a group the market decides which technologies they're going to be using. So what I was wondering really is whether people think Metro constitutes a crossroads of DOS-to-Windows magnitude, or if it's just a slight change of directions? I guess it's the latter.

Quote:

---

I suppose abstraction is the aid in this terminology.

---

Say you're a berserk with no other weapons than your bare hands. Even if you're ambitious you most likely won't be able to hurt that many before you get stopped and you probably won't succeed in strangling yourself to any greater harm. Sporting a shotgun on the other hand the situation changes dramatically. Even if you're completely docile with no malign intent whatsoever you're now a major threat both towards yourself and others. And if it's in your powers to launch a nuclear missile it gets even scarier. Now the fate of mankind may rest with you.

So generally, the higher the abstraction the more competent you must be. Powerful tools combined with low skill and bad judgement simply is a high-risk proposition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

As an individual programmer you're free not to care of course.

---

Actually I was thinking of a user's point of view. I can see how you got confused, but as a programmer I haven't actually looked at windows 8 ... yet ...

So what if metro maybe the next big tablet thing for windows. I know they are trying to generalize the way we use the computer or aka to simplify. This just proves my point. They are trying to abstract the ideal on how we use computers to a point of a click and drag of a pen. I don't care about a single app that is fullscreened unless it is a 3d game. Maybe on a tablet, but I don't need a single app taking up my computer screen. I haven't really tested windows 8 and I will give it a fair try like I always do before bashing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

So generally, the higher the abstraction the more competent you must be. Powerful tools combined with low skill and bad judgement simply is a high-risk proposition.

---

Go back to assembly and you will find nukes faster and more dangerous than a high level language should have. A high abstraction should remove me from cutting off my leg by accident. If it doesn't someone wrote some poor code/abstraction.

Ideally speaking, an abstraction is an ideal and a good ideal is one that provides the best way to due a certain task. If this task involves security, I expect this ideal to work correctly even in the worst case scenario.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nuzzle

started growing magic mushrooms in Sugarcandy Mountain

---

I suppose you think all drugs are evil except the ones the doctor prescribes or the ones over the counter. I can't help you there, but all those side effects from those drugs are a lot worse than what I care to mention. Drugs aren't evil nor do they have to be "good".

Go check your blood pressure nuzzle, you seem to have a high level of stress. Your post lately have been degrading... and no I am not attacking you.