Best OS GUIs thread

I was pretty small when it came out, but I got a lot of junkers and freebies that had 95 and 98 on them. Save for a few modern os features like snap, I really don't mind the idea of going back to that but with Vulkan and modern application support. It was the pinnacle before they decided they just HAD to find new ways to use all those CPU and GPU cycles.

It's a quarter century old user, what do you expect

>It's a quarter century old user

Attached: 63147321094732147320198472.png (1196x670, 449K)

I'm starting to see zoomers posting here about how 2010-2012 macbooks were THE BEST

It's an extremely underrated addition to 10.14

Attached: mojave dark mode.jpg (2048x1280, 237K)

not really anymore. the theme still exists deep down in the windows code because it's all taped together and fucked up, but the new taskbar, menu, file explorer, settings, etc, all don't exist in that theme and it really only works for about 15% of the OS overall. you have to do a lot of work to get it that far. you can hack together ways of making it work but it never really does.

unironically the best way to experience windows 95 theming on a modern OS is through linux.

the system was shit but the UI was pretty nice and consistent

...

you lack perspective
Windows 95 was really a pretty awesome accomplishment
It bridged both DOS, 16bit Windows, and 32bit Windows nearly perfectly.
It had built in networking, which was mostly absent from previous version of DOS/Windows (without add-ons)
It had great support for video and sound hardware of the day.
It really was a pretty great accomplishment.
And it was totally revolutionary. Windows 95 is the moment that Microsoft solidified their hegemony in the operating system space for over 25 years (and for the foreseeable future)

You had to be there to fully appreciate how amazing of an accomplishment it was. I remember getting beta versions of it while I was still running OS/2 because by that point Windows 3.x was even gaining traction, and OS/2, despite some of its superior features and architecture, wasn't really relevant except for multitasking under certain circumstances.

Windows 95 was pretty awesome.

>You had to be there
I'm 35

Windows ME

Attached: xpme.png (1024x768, 96K)

a good UI should be simple to use, like this one

And yet you talk shit?
Did your parents buy a shitty Packard Bell from Computer City and that's why you have a negative opinion of Windows 95?

>a good UI should be simple to use, like this one
fuck, forgot this one

Attached: welcome.png (640x480, 14K)

95 had a lot of good, solid UI testing behind it. An awful lot of shit hasn't changed since Windows 95 (well, maybe NT4) when it comes to settings dialogs and where things are, too (and many of them are only now getting changes because MS is pushing its new Windows 10 style settings, but that's a pile of shit).

Way back when, the only thing that seemed particularly nasty about Windows 95's interface was the awful file association dialog.
Using the OS again like 20 years later, there's a bunch of little quality-of-life shit that I never bothered with, like populating the SendTo folder with shortcuts to programs.

I thought 95 was ugly as shit back then compared to how Mac OS 8 looked when that came out, and I though the old Windows 3.1 buttons looked a bit nicer.
I still don't think the 95 UI is massively good looking, but it's very clean.
Was always disappointed that Windows didn't look more like MacOS or BeOS.

god, the NeXT UI is so sexy
There's some really retarded things about actually using it (menu positioning, trying to deal with having more than a few windows on screen, certain dialogs like color and font selection), but for the most part, it's so fucking nice and it looks great.

People liked Vista's UI.

like, the experience of having Vista on a machine, particularly near launch when everyone was running with shit drivers and underpowered hardware (well, "underpowered" -- Vista was still absurdly fat and demanded 512MB RAM as an absolute minimum and ate from 6 to 10GB disk in 2006, when people were running machines with 512MB-1GB RAM and had like a 30-60GB disk), was fucking AIDS
but the interface was nice and had a few small things that looked slightly nicer compared to 7's changes

RIP Terry.
1 year today.

/thread

Attached: 1330428881.th.44813.jpg (500x375, 21K)

System was cool, but the ugliest colour palette i've ever seen

>RIP Terry.
>1 year today.

wikipedia says august 11
(close enough though :/)

True, 3.0 was better

Attached: 1306449250.or.25834.png (640x480, 4K)

A fucking XP skin for ME? Why?

It's a theme engine with tons of themes
And why not? windows classic gets old too if you use it for some time

I'm still mad.

When is the Internet Archive going to emulate Windows 95? I want to browse through all the stupid software that I missed out on in the 90s.

Attached: doswin2.png (640x480, 21K)

wine on linux still uses the win95 themeing as default for all its uis

Best Windows UI to date

Attached: Screenshot-2015-07-22-09.46.36.jpg (1373x772, 295K)

This, it's so comfy. I wish that the OS itself was actually functional though. I installed it on an older machine (c2d e6850, 6gb ram) I want to use to play older games from the mid 2000s, and it ran like shit just web browsing. 7 ran better but its aesthetic is nowhere near as comfy

Not any time soon. Dosbox doesn't handle 9x well.
You can run win2k here, but it's really slow:
bellard.org/jslinux/vm.html?url=https://bellard.org/jslinux/win2k.cfg&mem=192&graphic=1&w=1024&h=768

I've been using on old PCs with similar specs in the past and it ran as good as 7. did you install the 2 service packs + other updates?

same. Mine is from 2007-2014. I occasionally boot it up when I visit my parents. Can't believe the OG power supply hasn't exploded yet after all these years of heavy use.

Why Windows 10 of course!

>inb4 you ask
Startisback++ for the start menu and Fences for the folders/icons on the desktop.

Attached: ltsc.png (2560x1440, 767K)

No... does modern software support Vista SP2, i.e. firefox or brave etc.? I also accidentally burned a 32 bit Vista on my disc so i gotta make a new disc with 64 bit. I only replaced Vista with 7 because I had a 64 bit 7 disc on hand

Attached: Windows-2000.png (800x600, 30K)

Beautiful. When is the flat design meme going to vanish?

nah you're stuck with outdated chrome and firefox (including derivatives like brave/opera and waterfox/palemoon). steam was phased out recently as well. maybe use something like midori idk.

The first green Steam UI was comfy. The one in the military green however was my favourite, it was just practical and simple ... and then they went with the dark shit.

Attached: file.png (614x456, 117K)

Hard to imagine these two existed at the same time basically

Baby duck syndrome.

this

it's not too hard. one GUI was made for office workers in mind and other was made by autistic amiga demosceners for likeminded people

Attached: 8b702de470550ae540f5d855ca72f6c4dadd035debf5000e1f5ecc6d545bd90b.png (799x999, 636K)

None because I can't have something like this :(

Attached: t7j7kj.jpg (1280x720, 242K)

Attached: novus.png (1024x768, 291K)

XP theming scene was dope

>anime
Get out!

Which DE is this? Smartphone stuff?

vista UI was comfy. vista UI to this day looks more modern than windows 10 and 7. i don't know why microsoft butchered its UI when all the complaints of vista had nothing to do with its UI. it was all because of its high resource consumption at a time where most machines only had 256 - 512mb of ram, single core processors, and a 40gb hard drive.

You couldn't even turn off window shadows in Vista, fuck that shit.

t. retard

Also, vista had unskinned cmd.

Attached: sddefault.jpg (640x480, 38K)

more like windows meme

>Systemsteuerung

I always wondered about why cmd looks always out of place
on windows 7 it has a thiccer border than every other window
on xp the cmd icon shows an xp styled cmd but the actual decoration is a wonky classic style

Attached: Untitled.png (797x367, 56K)

see?
cmd has a thicker border
why?

Attached: Untitled2.png (774x526, 201K)

devblogs.microsoft.com/commandline/windows-command-line-inside-the-windows-console/
I'm not reading thoroughly, but I can't seem to find an answer. I can only guess that 30 year old code wasn't changed that well.

>non-square pixel art on a display with square pixels
Disgusting

Attached: windows boomer meme.png (1024x640, 162K)

Noice~

Attached: grey.png (7680x4320, 1.04M)

What about it?

Windows was never good. It's always been an inferior product.

Attached: ms-dos-screenshot-100251673-large.jpg (580x556, 76K)

It's hard to be superior if compatibility is what you care about

The Indigo Magic Desktop on IRIX was about 20 years ahead of its time.

Attached: d08dc463aeb02a666f46d66adf58525e.png (1600x1024, 93K)

It's just CDE with a custom theme
Which is just mwm with a custom theme

Overall less user friendly than windows 3.0, and that is saying A LOT

Only if you had Aero disabled for any reason. Vista's XP-style software theme renderer didn't skin conhost.exe (or Task Manager IIRC), just like Windows XP.
Win7 doesn't skin conhost.exe either, under the same circumstances. But by then 7's release, you had more than 512MB RAM and Aero-compatible video cards and drivers, so you never noticed.

>It's just CDE with a custom theme
It's not CDE. It's entirely different. Are you retarded? Yes you are. I don't even need to ask.
>Which is just mwm with a custom theme
MWM is only the window manager. That and the Motif toolkit are the only things that IMD and CDE have in common.

Doesn't change that it sucks usability wise.

i got eye cancer from this

You've obviously never used it. You're a retarded faggot if you think it's anything like graphical shell over DOS. Software was half the reason SGI workstations cost $20,000. They're not made for drooling poorfag bideo bamers like you.

Step aside.

Attached: RIP Westwood.png (1280x1024, 105K)

>piece of shit 90s ui that was derivative even then
>this is peak touches my autism
>get called by those who were there
>childish shit flinging
I'm gonna say LARP.

Doesn't change the fact that the GUI lacked most options you'd see even in Win95. So no, it was no at all ahead in time, it was more a step back into the 1980s where GUIs were not taken very seriously and muh shell was the one program that HAD to be open all the time to actually do shit.

This.
I literally use Window Maker just because it looks like this.

Attached: AESTHETIC.png (1280x2402, 1.03M)

>It's just CDE with a custom theme
It takes nothing from CDE (and it's a lot nicer to use than CDE).

>Which is just mwm with a custom theme
CDE is a whole DE.

>Overall less user friendly than windows 3.0, and that is saying A LOT
as someone who has used original 3.0 (not 3.1) very recently, you're fucking retarded
3.0's file manager is absurdly bad (3.1's fixes a bunch and moves some things into the left side-bar, 3.0 just has all these free-floating windows when you're likely running at 640x480).
Progman is an absolute pile of shit that again, clutters a bunch of small windows into a bigger one.

It's a perfectly ordinary Motif system, but with a bunch of extensions.
If you hate how Motif looks and feels, that's fine, but say that outright.

>Doesn't change the fact that the GUI lacked most options you'd see even in Win95
user, the heyday of SGI machines was the early-90s (before cheap NT4 machines with Pentiums started cutting into their high-end computing market)
it was from a time before Windows 95
>So no, it was no at all ahead in time, it was more a step back into the 1980s where GUIs were not taken very seriously and muh shell was the one program that HAD to be open all the time to actually do shit.
although there's a handful of things you need a terminal for to configure, 99% of your use of an SGI machine was graphical (they were graphics workstations you retard)

a lot of the 3D software available for the machines kinda sucked in terms of usability, but that's a different argument entirely
SGI's IRIX is a heavily graphical system.

That's great, so it was a modern system for it's time. But again, how was it "20 years ahead"?

I've been using SGI machines at work since 2004.

You don't have any idea what you're talking about, wintoddler.

Yes, faglord. 20 years ahead. Stuff like SVG icons, proper audio controls, etc. These things still suck ass on other systems to this day.

This.

Because when you see the face of God, you will die
And there will be nothing left of you
Except the God-man, the God-woman
The heavenly man, the heavenly woman
The heavenly child
There'll be prayer on your lips day and night
There'll be a song of jubilee waiting for your king
There will be nothing you will not be be looking for in this world
Excepting for your god

>proper audio controls
any real sound card has these. The only reason SGI could integrate them well is because they also built the hardware.
>SVG icons
They look like ass and aren't even antialiased.
>These things still suck ass on other systems to this day.
No, any modern linux DE uses svg icons

Again you prove that you have NO real arguments for your ridiculous claim.

Attached: 2019-08-08-172521_1280x1024_scrot.png (1280x1024, 119K)

you are in the wrong thread
this is best os gui
not "I want to scrape my eyes out"

The best parts of classic Mac and Windows 9x

Attached: b5petracker.png (640x480, 15K)

Oof.

Attached: toilet paper.jpg (672x448, 84K)

BeOS was supposed to change the world!
This is all Micro$oft and Bill Gate's fault!

Attached: 3c69dd5a222149e8fce0c4daa112599c84c41514e12f157f954ef6dd2e167547.jpg (474x569, 26K)

>there are even people who now call Vista comfy on here
So you think Windows 10 looks good?
Vista looks better than 7.

Old OS X was sex.

Attached: MacOSXSnowLeopard1.jpg (1199x751, 235K)

Not an argument. Every Linux DE is insistent dogshit that looks like

>GURU MEDITATION
automate shit, Ian
That's not even a DE.

>can't cut and paste folders
forums.macrumors.com/threads/how-to-cut-paste-files-folders-in-os-x.183472/