Muh gloss

Vista was universally hated by almost everyone. Win 7 was peak UI design.

Wangblows 10 botnet niggers WISH they had all this swag

7 was the beginning of the downfall

Vista>7>8 beta>8>8.1>10

Vista is actually solid after you apply the 49 service packs or whatever that basically turn it into 7 anyway.

Vista was hated for being a slow resource hog that released on fucking Pentium 4s with 512 MB ram. Seven is a bit better on resources than Vista but not much. The biggest difference is simply the hardware it released on the a few tweaks to the default settings. Seven is basically reskined striped down Vista.

Attached: 1456591795524.png (1200x600, 289K)

fpbp

>first post
>best post
>trips
Absolutely based.

Attached: 1518839157075.gif (640x480, 422K)

Initially Vista also suffered the same problems Windows ME did, virtually no hardware compatibility. The only difference is that Vista got some service packs and made shit better while Windows ME users were told to 'eat shit' until Windows 2000/XP came out.

But I will agree that, by and large, under the hood Windows 7 is just Vista with a more consistent UI and all the service packs installed.

10 is also basically reskinned Vista. All the good parts of modern Windows were built by the Vista team.

somewhat unrelated
>Jow Forums is a minimalism cult
>yet it somehow hates flat
explain yourselves

Worse than MacOS (any version)

>I can't differentiate between good and bad design so i just go with the latest stupid fad
Average """minimalist""" desktop thread poster.

I think aero looks disgusting and really like metro.

>some of us like minimalism
>some of us like good things
It's simple really.

Absolutely disgusting, metrosexuals need to get off my board.

Flat is not minimal. It's exactly the same as textured, just lower contrast and more ugly. And usually wastes more space.

fuck is wrong with you

>Vista was universally hated by almost everyone
Because it was a normalfag meme to hate it. 90% of those people never even used it.
It's basically identical to Win7 with some extra optional bloat, so of course it ran like shit on shit hardware that barely ran XP. When 7 was released it was basically just another service pack for Vista without lots of changes, and by that time third party software had matured to be stable on it. There haven't been major changes since Vista because it would break stuff again. This is one of the reasons why MS is pushing the new metro garbage apps so much.

peak soi

you have to understand, it came after XP, which was the most abhorrent GUI to have existed
the glass effect is okay

>Flip 3D
You are like a kid.
Watch this.

Attached: 4dglass.jpg (1200x750, 200K)

>the same problems Windows ME did, virtually no hardware compatibility
ME is literally the same as 98SE with some minor changes, it isn't any more unstable than that. The big issue was that manufacturers loaded their PCs with WDM drivers by default, which were still unstable, and that they sold low end garbage PCs with 32 or 64MB RAM and a shitty celeron. It was also at the beginning of the capacitor plague.

I just really don't like the glass thing, it was cool at first but now it just makes me want to gag.

Flat design is a blessing from the aesthetic gods.

>unironically the reason I installed linux.
>unironically the only thing that worked in linux
>mp3, wireless, networking didn't work without buying more hardware

that is why l00n1x will never be a real desktop

>Freetard jealous of an obsolete OS that doesn't require the user to configure some obscure files to enjoy functioning UI
The absolute state of lincucks.

yes, but you went on to say you 'really liked Metro'
Theres swimming against the tide, and deep-rooted physiological disturbance. Glass/Aero, most initially liked it, as you said. Metro, near universal wtf. I think theyd have maybe even got away with it, had they left the start button. You make a bad initial impression AND tkae away tried and trusted methods of doing shit, user aint gonna thank you.. Some of metro design principles are probably theroretically sound, just, in practice, people fucking hate it.

I like metro, so that means I have some deep rooted physiological disturbance?

yes. any more questions?
you'd be hard pressed to describe Metro as 'universally loved' - Aero, however, for the most part was.

So basically win 8/7 are modded vista. What about 10? I noticed some win 7 looking stuff there when i used it.

Elaborate on my deep rooted physiological disturbance, what organ is malfunctioning to cause me to really like metro over aero? What everyone else likes is irrelevant to what I like.

you have described your problem as 'physiological' - that narrows it down. Pick one form bottom of Pic Retaed pyramind - excretion, perhaps? Maybe, you are indeed full of shit and Metro is a crock of same. Designing UI's for a mass product like Windows is not about appealing to the odd indivualist, they fucked it up, the vast majority hate it and you are being merely disputatious in claiming to like the POS. It shit and ypur opinion is irrelevant - the consensus has spoken, now STFU

Attached: Physiological-vs-Psychological-Needs[1].jpg (500x327, 26K)

Or I just don't like Aero.
Why go all Freudian about it?

ok, we shall approach from another angle.
>If you have two UIs, for a mass market product. One is near-universally liked, and easy to use. The other is confusing, and widely hated. Which is better?
Hard Mode: I DGAF, *I* don't like Aero is not an acceptable answer

They changed too much in Vista. Something much more like XP would've been much better received.

Obviously the one that your customers want?
Other people liking aero still does not make me like aero, I'm autistic.

>Linuxtards were coping with poor knock-off gauss effect visual themes for window compositors that couldn’t ever match the original Aero.
lol this is completely true

>I'm autistic.
thank you, we got it cleared up now.

>cant explain why wvista sucks ass so trying to pick on the reason how it looks

Each version of Windows is based on the version that came before it.

Go into a successful poo's house and see how much glitzy, gaudy, over-the-top, sparkly shit they have. Vista is the software equivalent of that.

wrong
windows nt 3.1 came from os/2

>XP, which was the most abhorrent GUI to have existed
How can someone be this wrong

and who lives in a Windows Metro house?
autists, Dutch non-representationalists, and, eh, thats it?

That's because it was NT and not DOS

The only reason why Vista got such a bad reputation is because of retards trying to run it on their 90’s beige box. I bought it right after the launch and it was amazing on good hardware. It felt like stepping into the future after using XP.

What's so repulsive about the Metro UI? It's basically the same except the start menu is full screen.

The biggest problem with Vista on existing hardware was graphics drivers. Most GPUs didn't even meet the requirements for Aero. The ones that did often had poorly written drivers that would regularly crash. Some audio controllers were also unsupported. And this was 2003-2006 era hardware. Nobody was putting it on Pentium 2s, 3s, K6s or whatever, not for anything for than tests anyway.

Modern future people who look and act like Steve Jobs, who are more than happy to destroy the past to make way for their vision of the future.

I personally wouldn't use 'repulsive' its actually quite interesting. The problem, people actually use the Start Menu to Start programs, not wonder at a multi-colored LSD trip of random iconography. Metro, as said, was confusing and had ZERO relation to the user's experience of how to do things -it got precisely as far as 'where is the fucking Start button? What the fuck is this shit?' - first impressions are often correct, and, it will never recover from that, probabky not undeservedly, sorry.
>

Attached: live20tiles-11331054[1].png (606x341, 55K)

uironically looks a lot better than windows7, and slightly better than windows 10

without service packs it ran like absolute dogshit no matter what hardware you used

after SP1 it basically ran like windows 7. windows 7 was a massive step down in ui design though, both in terms of looks and programming

>The only reason why Vista got such a bad reputation is because of retards trying to run it on their 90’s beige box. I bought it right after the launch and it was amazing on good hardware.
selective memory. it ran like absolute dogshit. i used it when it was new and it was dogshit until sp1

I honestly hated this design and skipped over Vista and 7 because of it. I am glad it is gone. I am glad it is dead.

7 is Vista dumbed down to normalfags.

This so much.
To run vista smoothly you needed a duel core processor and 2 gigs of ram and decent on board graphics or a card for areo.
Spes like that would have been something to brag about in 06.

I remember seeing that for the first time and felt basically the same. Later on when they restored the start button and added the option to go to the desktop at logon it made it much more bearable.

Whenever someone says they're using Windows 8 these days, they always add "with classic shell" or whatever as a qualifier, as if it's unusable without that. I use fully updated Windows 8.1, and I think it's totally usable all by itself.

>Seven is basically reskined striped down Vista.
Which is why I prefer 7

And for a "universally hated" OS, at its peak, it still had 20 times the market share of Linux.

Attached: 58135684.jpg (400x400, 86K)

Everything is better than Windows 10.
Except GNOME 3.

>It's better than Windows 10
that's not a very high bar

>not gtk dark
How am I supposed to be edgy with this corporate normie theme?

Some guy sent out an email with instructions on how to make batch file to boot straight to the desktop when we all upgraded.

I tended to just push the Windows key if I wanted the Start menu in 8.0.

I don't know if you are talking about Windows 8 or Windows 10, but can you explain what is so bad about doing this from your perspective.

I press start and have icons directly in view in a small window that pops up, literally faster to open programs this way than any other way. I honestly think it's great. I would like to understand the legitimate criticism of this.

I always thought Vista's default was aiming for people like you

where's my purble place gang at

space cadet or GTFO

Attached: qgxi6RJHSKgBkHUcYHcrnn.jpg (1121x663, 159K)

>not playing Chess Titans
brainlet

Attached: 85e.jpg (764x551, 263K)

/thread

Windows 2000 was released before Windows ME, just fyi.

It is aesthetically pleasing.

Rare to see a post of this quality on Jow Forums these days.

freetards btfo

It's up there with xfce4

>>muh gloss
>>muh transparency
>>muh neon colors
>>muh frost glass effect
>>muh Flip 3D
I miss all these actually
Modern flat design sucks. It feel boring as fuck.

It really does. I am forced to use Windows Ten at work. Looking at it just makes me depressed as hell. As if getting up and going to work was even fun to start with.

i ve seen icewm or something that had aero or something

flat is garbage but only for windows
you can see nice flat gtk/wm themes

>wireless, networking
don't buy meme chinese hw

Aero was Microsoft's 5-year-late effort to catch-up to early Mac OS X's composited window manager and super-glossy Aqua look.

Attached: 10-0-Cheetah-Command-Tab.png (1024x768, 172K)

pcs came with it
don't play dumb

no this is

Attached: Untitled.png (800x600, 11K)