Thread: Beryl or Aero

Aero on Vista just simply can't compete. Beryl is definately a lot more fascinating to look at. When I run Beryl it seems to run the effects smoother, and on a machine with less overall RAM than Vista seemed to require. And outside of all the rumors I never had a problem with Beryl being unstable, and it looks much better than Visa. Whats the deal with Microsoft? No one can tell me that they can't pull off a 3D desktop wtf are they waiting on?

Let me just put it this way. Beryl compared to Aero is like comparing Atari 2600 to Xbox 360. What do you guys think?

It has nothing to do with system requirements, Aero can do everything Beryl can do and more (with antialiasing, a word alien to Linux lips it seems), Microsoft simply chose to make it subtle so that people wouldn't get tired of it. Beryl is nothing new, it's just a minor upgrade to XGL, which I tried out a year ago. I drooled over the shiny cube and jelly windows for a while at first, but after a week I simply got annoyed and tired with it. Can you use openGL while in Beryl yet? That was a major problem I remember.

I was actually going to try ubuntu out this morning, I switched harddrives for the occasion and everything, but unfortunately my ubuntu disk was fucked. I might find time to bother with it later though.

Yup as far as I know right now you can use Celestia and Stellarium and they should run pretty fast. Let me know what you think if you decided to use it on Ubuntu. I seriously don't think I could ever get tired of it. But hey that's just me.

After using both, I prefer Aero. I agree with MSG that Beryl just gets boring after a while, and I know my computer isn't that great, but it does slow it down a bit unnecessarily just for a bit of eye-candy.

Aero is even more resource hogging, but I prefer it because it looks.. more professional? Microsoft would never come out with a rotating cube...






... Then they'd really be copying Linux and Mac OS X