maybe a silly idea?

With the Windows 8 UI being an abomination and needing replacement with things such as Classic Shell to make it into a usable system, would a RISC OS style shell replacement for it be viable?

Possible? Yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alternative_shells_for_Windows

Viable? pass :)

It is possible; however I fear that some of the great things about RISC OS (path handling, Obey$Dir, the modular extensibility…) might be painful to implement, not to mention having to break everything RISC OS like to fit it into the Windows way of doing stuff…

The obvious solution might be to just not use Windows 8?

I tried Vista ages ago. My thoughts on that are why I’m still using XP.

I was thinking more of just just the same level of replacement as classic shell. I would think some of the nice RISC OS UI features wouldn’t be sensible to impliment (back button and focus not in front windows).

If it were halfway between RISC OS and Windows XP, it would be attractive for RO users, who had to use windows. (Windows 8 is a jarring mismatch, already, so a hybrid would not be a step back, as it would were you starting with Windows 7, for example)

The RO filer on windows would be nice. (And Appdirs should be easy to implement.)

I find windows 8 to be the best version of Windows by far. It even has nice flat window furniture just like my RISC OS desktop.

I find windows 8 to be the best version of Windows by far. It even has nice flat window furniture just like my RISC OS desktop.

I believe may have strayed too far from your bridge. You may get caught in the sunlight.
(be kind to trolls week :)

be kind to trolls week

:-) Here’s my windows 8 and RO desktop. capture.jpg, Don’t like textures/pseudo3d/transparency. As to whether Windows 8 is better than XP – I say what I see. I have no problem with you prefering XP.

That is Windows 8? Looks like a tidied up Gem.
Still, at least the translucency has been ditched. When you need minicomputer power just to write letters and stuff, you know something ain’t right… :-)

I find windows 8 to be the best version of Windows by far.

Could you qualify this please? Are you referring to Windows 8 with or without the ironically named modern ui?

If it is with classic shell, or similar, installed then I see your point, but I think Windows 2000 was better.

If you are referring to out of the box Win 8, and I have hardly met anyone who finds it anything other than atrocious, so I cannot believe anyone who remains with RISC OS could actually find it anything other than an abomination. Unless either you missed a smilie, or you are slyly referring to the fact that it is so awful, it might do permanent damage to the Windows near monopoly.

Out of the box windows 8 and I am being genuine.

I have hardly met anyone who finds it anything other than atrocious.

Maybe because they liked using older versions of windows – I never did.

Older Windows came in two styles. Win95-like and FisherPrice/FancyGlass/OohMyGraphicsCardIsBettetThanYours.

It seems me that Win8 tosses this away with aplomb to try to resemble the way AOL and CompuServe looked in the mid ’90s. This is progress? What next, Win9 looking like Arthur?

That said, the radical changes of the it-worked UI, the move to subscription licencing, the demise of TechNet… Makes one wonder what they’re thinking.

If your idea of progress is textured windows, graduated fill/textured window furniture, pseudo 3d edges to dialogue boxes then yes I can see why you don’t like windows 8. For me that kind of desktop should go the same way as woodchip walls and artex ceilings.

Did you see the video from the persion who reviewed using RISC OS for the first time. The RISC OS 3 desktop, which we all loved when it came out, looks dreadful now. It certainly didn’t age well.

Out of the box windows 8 and I am being genuine.

This beggars belief. It is unbelievably bad. even with classic, you have to drag the mouse up the screen to get to the login page.

In out of the box ‘modern’ mode, if you are on the desktop and open an mp3 it grabs the whole screen, and you have to alt tab back to the desktop. I could have got a copy for about £30 but I tried it first, it is just horrible.

It is like running Windows 3.1 with DOS apps, but with the option of not being full screen removed.

How can anyone who appreciates the excellent RISC OS UI find this anything but a disjointed mess?

With classic shell, I could like with it (and had I known about it when the £30 offer was on I might have).

But without it, if someone gave me a machine it would be formatted and linux of some flavour installed within hours. (If that long)

Ok I get it you don’t like it, Fair enough.

if you are on the desktop and open an mp3 it grabs the whole screen

erm no it doesn’t. Mine asks me what program do I want to use.

Anyway this isn’t the place to discuss Windows it’s a RISC OS forum and yes I do prefer RISC OS GUI.

Couldn’t be pestered installing linux, it’s only RISC OS I’m interested in and Windows does everything RISC OS doesn’t.

Did you see the video from the persion who reviewed using RISC OS for the first time.

What, the mom video? The number of wild guesses and factual errors was, um, interesting. After all, remember, RISC OS is the one that wipes the disc when it is shut down…

The RISC OS 3 desktop, which we all loved when it came out,

Bearing in mind that the competition of the time was Windows 3.1x!

looks dreadful now. It certainly didn’t age well.

I’m not sure I’d stoop to “dreadful”. Plain, yes. Dated, yes. Dreadful? No. Arthur’s mishmash of colours (and Windows 1 for what it is worth) is what I’d call dreadful.

it would be formatted and linux of some flavour installed within hours

I’d try and push some version of XP on it. I get all the positive attributes of Linux, but you cannot imagine how much I think the filesystem is retarded. Everything hanging off a master directory, a mish-mash of "which (s)bin is this file in, an apparently complete lack of sanity regarding application installation which results in crap spewed all over the friggin place (I had to make a map of the filesystem of my PVR just so I could find all the bits), and MYFILE.TXT being different to myfile.txt in this day and age. You might think it is a juvenile whinge, but as far as I am concerned the Unix filesystem at user level is like a time machine transporting you back to the days when computers were massive and had tape spools. Ubuntu is making great leaps and bounds in hiding the low level stuff from you, and Android makes it hard to even get as far as seeing the filesystem, so there is hope yet. ;-)

erm no it doesn’t. Mine asks me what program do I want to use.

And what happens subsequently if you instruct Windows to “always use this program”? I mean, my XP box doesn’t ask me every time I run an mp3, it starts WinAMP…

yes I do prefer RISC OS GUI.

Ditto. I don’t prefer it because it looks better, I prefer it for reasons of functionality. For two-dimensional drags, for an icon bar you can drop stuff on, for being able to start software without it insisting on splattering empty windows all over the screen, for a task manager that tells you useful stuff, for being able to give input to a window that is not on top, for ease of shifting windows around the window stack, and so on…

it’s only RISC OS I’m interested in and Windows does everything RISC OS doesn’t.

RISC OS is where my my pet projects live. Windows is for internet and watching animé… Mmm, maybe some other stuff. The two have strengths and weaknesses, so they both have a place, though Windows is largely logical (it can do the sort of stuff I want done) and RISC OS is largely emotional. However, no matter what the reasoning, both have a place.

then yes I can see why you don’t like windows 8

It seems to me (thinking also of Unity) that people are attempting to redefine the UI for the sake of trying to make things simpler. Maybe my mother would like Unity? Maybe she’d like Windows 8? For me, a long-term desktop-metaphor-user, I see it as change for the sake of being trendy. The desktop idea wasn’t perfect, but it worked. Those used to it, and the power user bits, will see modernisation as taking it and breaking it. I’m all for change if something better comes along (keyboard→mouse→touchpad→tap’n’swipe), but the concept of “better” is very subjective.

for being able to start software without it insisting on splattering empty windows all over the screen,

To be fair, the fault lies with cretinous software authors that build things to open windows before they are needed or when they simply aren’t needed at all. Blaming the OS for application author stupidity isn’t fair.
Now the fact that the OS author is the application author in a lot of the naff instances might be pertinent.

I’m not sure I’d stoop to “dreadful”. Plain, yes. Dated, yes. Dreadful? No.

RISC OS2 looks better now.

And what happens subsequently if you instruct Windows to “always use this program”?

It just uses the program you choose like XP does. If you want to change the program used it’s easy to do.

I don’t use the full screen apps or the apps store – no point I’m only using it on an old laptop so no touch screen. Works virtually identically to windows 7 but with a few improvements. The ‘modern’ interface just replaces the start menu I prefer it to the start menu – obviously others don’t.

My laptop was originally XP but it works much better with windows 8

Re why RISC OS is better, I agree but there is one feature I like in windows and that’s double clicking the title bar to get full size – the full size icon isn’t always visible on RISC OS.

Blaming the OS for application author stupidity isn’t fair.

I believe it is justified. Windows does not have an icon bar per se, so has always used the idea of a newly started program opening windows. Likewise you will need to remember to minimise and not close the windows as that will usually quit the app. Again, software authors could trap this, but doing so goes against one of the design decisions of the look and feel of Windows.
In short, it isn’t up to the application author to attempt to code around shortcomings of the OS.

Windows 8 UI examined; now…what were we saying about RISC OS? ;-)

If you had used windows 8 you’d know what was wrong with the article.

if you are on the desktop and open an mp3 it grabs the whole screen

erm no it doesn’t. Mine asks me what program do I want to use.

Yes it does, or did. Now it has classic shell and itunes it doesn’t. Still does something equally braindead with images, but that can be fixed similarly.

However the point is, it shouldn’t need to be fixed, and it shouldn’t need freeware to be usable. And if you try and tell me metro is usable on a 27" screen, I shall know you are trolling.* I am quite prepared to admit that apart from the metro system Windows 8 is quite good. (Metro of course being a showstopper), the mismatch of two UIs is a total joke, and hence the reason I posed the original question.

*Assuming you desire to use your system for more than one task at a time.

I don’t use the classic shell so can’t comment about that. I wouldn’t consider changing the program you want to use by default a fix. It’s what you do in windows – it seems to be obsessed by it as there are umpteen ways of doing it.

I would consider metro to be unusable on anything other than a tablet so I only use it as a start menu for the desktop. Media centre is also unusable as I don’t use a remote control.

So if I’m understanding you correctly to get a windows you expect you want the start menu back so you can avoid having to look at metro? I say that because as far as I can see that is the only practical difference to windows 7. Me I never liked windows enough to be that bothered.

In RISC OS I have to go to far greater lengths to get it how I like – I have to recompile the rom.

you want the start menu back so you can avoid having to look at metro?

Almost. To avoid being jarred and slowed down by the discontinuity of it.

If the system had no metro at all, then I could agree that it is good, pretty much the only issue is the UI.

But it is a showstopper.

And having default programs that use a UI that is only suitable for tiny touch screens IS a fault.

And trying to find anything to change the configuration is a nightmare.

I think you are only the third person I have had any interaction with who actually likes it. Though to be honest, most people are just ignoring it and buying a iPad instead.

(I am obviously not including those who like it after hacking the UI)

It’s possible but you might have a few technical problems