What the fuck happened to the GUI, everywhere?
GNOME3 is a nightmare (lel no taskbar), KDE is a genital wart since KDE4, Android and Apple dumbed down as shit, Windows Phone is a contradiction of functionality, even the Windows 7 taskbar is cancer, requiring you to click more.
We already had everything working perfectly, around 2002-2004. Since then, ebola started.
I will dump the images of previous era GUIs. Please tell me, what was wrong with them, and what is better now.
Contributions are welcome.
I also remember when gnome was good. KDE too.
Calling pic related "previous UI" is a strech since the it's still used in yosemite, but it did release in 2001.
>even the Windows 7 taskbar is cancer
You can disable always-on grouping and make it use small icons with text, you know. You basically get a better xp/vista taskbar, with pinnable programs and rearrangeable icons.
The fact that idiots (90%) use the default settings is a different problem.
Like most things visual, guis follow fashion trends. It wasn't until the turn of the century that advances in hardware allowed guis to be more themable with bitmaps and transparency and shit. Once that happened, everyone has been trying to 1-up each other with more bizarre looking interfaces.
I think I've successfully riced XFCE to be functional and look nice
I use windows classic on my desktop since it needs every bit of performance
Not all modern features are bad. Transparency in certain places, windows that subtly fly to the taskbar upon being minimized, the desktop sliding to one side when you switch workspaces, all these things can be very good when done properly because they give the user a very physical understanding of what's going on on his system.
That said, the latest fashion of "less is more" is rather annoying because it's often taken to extremes.
Nothing wrong with it - still Masterrace
That is the best interface of all times I swear.
Not bad. I still think classic Mac OS was perfection. Good spacing, excellent fonts, and over all consistency. If I ever make a hobby OS and it's mature enough to support a window manager, I'll base its appearance off System 7.
> What the fuck happened to the GUI, everywhere?
Mobile happened. UXtards who wanted to make money writing shitty apps and locking their users into walled gardens, or UXtards who wanted to get a job at companies that did that sort of shit, had nowhere to develop/display their 1337 skillz than by "contributing" (aka ruining) open source products like GNOME and Firefox, and even those on the corporate side had to get with the Win8 Metro shit or see their careers lag.
Enlightenment e16 with an Aqua theme. Its workspace management is pretty good.
There's nothing really '90s kid going in here, old UIs just feel more functional and were designed for a much different, mainly professional audience. They felt like tools and acted like them too.
Nobody's shitting on your preferences here, so fuck off back to whatever threads you like and stop shitting on ours out of a need to attack some irrelevant bogeyman.
No you didn't. But I don't blame you. If you couldn't see that you provided no arguments you are helplessly dumb and, by definition, unable to participate in conversations.
Don't worry, it's common nowadays. You can have a relatively normal life.
why do people on /g/ get so fucking emotional over old things? they either love it with a passion or lash out with rage when someone makes a post about anything other than the latest MacBook™
Well, I guess when I look at it again, it's not necessarily inconsistent, it's just kind of crude looking, especially that launcher(?) in the lower right corner.
Not that I would expect you to give a fuck, it just doesn't look right.
It looked nice, correct. I have doubts about the actual functionality, but I never used it.
Anyway, this is GNOME 1.0. Who would have thought that GNOME would grow to be such a successful desktop? And then again, who would suspect that they'd ruin everythng with 3.0
ProTip: You can improve the usability of your 8.1 by installing Bob
It isn't a launcher, it's an iconbox, where minimized apps go. It can be placed anywhere on the screen.
The thing about a good UI isn't how it looks in screenshots, but how beautifully it functions when you're actually trying to get something done with it.
I think old GUIs waste too much visual space to be called perfect.
One of the things I dislike in many UIs is the title bar on windows. Gnome 3, and Windows programs with ribbons on the title bar are sexy as fuck.
One of the things I dislike the most about new UIs is how they hide every single feature and only keep the most common ones. I think they focus too much on the looks and sacrifice functionality.
I would like to create my own DE one day when I get the skills. It'll be inspired by old UI functionality and customization but with modern looks and without going for the ultra flat & minimal retardness that plagues our world today.
The UI was nice. The system itself wasn't too useful, mainly because it didn't have almost any apps.
But it was good enough for internet + shitposting + music, which were exactly the only things for which I needed a computer at that time
The person that started the discussion around redesigning the GNOME desktop (Owen Taylor) had worked at RedHat on GTK+ and Pango for over a decade prior to leading the development of GNOME Shell. He still works there. The people who put forward the original ideas that lead to GNOME Shell were majorly involved in GNOME, either the desktop or the foundation, for some time before. The design of Adwaita was also handled primarily by veteran GTK+ developers, and the meetup for that was hosted by Sun Microsystems, which were also involved as long-time contributors to the toolkit.
The shell came from the overwhelmingly majority of the GNOME development community.
>who would suspect that they'd ruin everythng with 3.0
Anyone capable of comparing GNOME 2.24 to XFCE 4.6. There was little reason to continue dedicating man-hours into fixing the mess that had slowly grown from GNOME's iterative design. Not when XFCE was doing _exactly_ the same thing, with less memory use and architectural fragmentation.
Two easy examples being accessibility and ibus support in modern GNOME. What managed to make it into legacy GNOME was technically impressive (purely that they managed to get patches into surrounding GNOME projects so half of it would work), but looked like amateur hour compared to every other desktop at that time.
Another easy example being that humans can actually read and contribute to the Nautilus source code without having to indulge in hallucinogenics so they can ask their spirit animal what the fuck is going on.
Fixing stuff does not require inventing some completely different-looking turd. I imagine that GNOME became a mess, but I'm sure it could be fixed. If I remember correctly, dconf and Project Ridley came before G3.
Ah, Nautilus. It was initially created by the infamous eazel, later extended by Ximian. Such a heritage must have been a terrible code.
The original concept of the taskbar in Windows 95 was that each button would be a running application. Basically, it's supposed to be an application switcher, not a window switcher. In this context, it makes sense why it defaults to aggressively grouping windows like this now.
Yes, it can take more clicks, but overall it's a more consistent two-level application button -> windows system.
On the other hand it isn't perfect, mostly because a lot of applications that still have support the old way of doing things anyway because even if it was kind of a mess in Vista and before, it still sort of worked
Nice. FVWM masterrace though
Not exactly. One button-one application was not the approach of Windows 95 (and the new task switcher). It was actually the 3.11 way, where one icon meant one program, and the program was having multiple "internal windows", so called MDI. There was a small war about this stuff, and 95 taskbar is a "task switcher". Now go figure if another Word document is another task or not.
MDI vs SDI war took ages. Fucking Excel 2010 is still MDI!
It looks no less functional than anything else that was running on the platform at the time.
I remember my dad giving me a 600E with early GNOME or KDE on it when I was around 9 or 10, wish I could remember.
I hope they seriously try to breathe some life back into this software.
7tt enables customization that should have been there by default imho.
Best of all you can hide the names of some programs, but keep them for others i.e. excel where you want to see the document name, or explorer for folder names.
But of course now pdf viewers and office programs are starting to move to tabs instead of multiple windows, precisely because the windows taskbar is shit by default.
yeah, it looks like they're working on it a little. It would be cool to see it re-invented as a functional, "modern" (feature-wise) DE
especially customization, even adding applications to the panel is a bitch
it's been a while since I've run my Solaris 8 shitbox, but I remember editing a ton of configs just for some basic customization
though I think I remember you could have some basic functionality, since I remember setting up a direct shortcut to xterm without opening a text editor
classic is still pretty good tbh
>disgusting modern Windows icon set
what do you think of my old linux install
Yeah, ricing Windows is pretty annoying.
If you manage the tray icons it isn't really too bad as far
I originally put it to work benchmarking/testing S423 CPUs and then it become my file archiver because it's too fucking solid, I'd like to replace it with a dual shitburst xeon of some kind in the future but I'll probably find it hard to justify that either
If you don't care about form, then why the fuck are you posting in this thread?
Still using xp with the classic theme like this anon. Never gonna upgrade. Never. Fuck you upgraded anons.
> Oooooohhhh.....must have whatever shitty new windows release microsoft sells just because they sell it. Fuck vista, 7, 8, and any other new ones.
>If you manage the tray icons it isn't really too bad as far
"as far as having a nice consistent look goes"
I tried replacing that thing with an XP system and it was truly shit, holy fuck nvidia drivers are awful
zero days and other shit
as long as you have common sense things seem to go fine
don't even notice any background botnets, if there are they're pretty clever, my piece of shit feels like it can outrun my w520 sometimes
Fuck no. I don't want any of their updates.
> Ooooohhhh noes......but the security updates I won't get.
Big fucking deal. I get along just fine. Why does everyone go into panic mode if they can't get any more updates? My computer runs just fine without their super special security updates.
who needs all that mouse bullshit, just the keyboard is what you need ya'll
>What the fuck happened to the GUI, everywhere?
Everybody want touchscreen GUI in a fucking PC. Who need touch GUIs in laptop/desktop that lacks touch?
It's basically exactly the same as we used to have, but with more colors than your shit example because we don't use shit stark white eyesplitting desktops any more.
Just because your desktop looked like shit doesn't mean mine did. KDE/Plasma is the closest you can come while still being good.
Anyone that shits on KDE/Plasma is mentally retarded.
>XFCE removed the option to easily edit the rifght click menu
what are you even talking about? like seriously. the desktop fly-out menu? application-specific context menus? they're all still there, and the fly-out menu is easily modifiable.
Sure, lets go back to CGA mode GUIs on our IBM PC AT with 640kb of RAM!
Or better yet, lets go back to CLI all the time. When your prompt is .>_ You'd need a text book on how to boot the damn computer and get it to do something.
Then we could go back to programs stored on a 360k floppies or casette tapes.
And if that is still to advanced then go back to flipping switches and reading the output on LEDs.
Enjoy the computing dark ages gtards.
I used to dual boot Windows Vista and Ubuntu on a laptop. I remember Vista being terrible compared to Ubuntu, which was using Gnome 2 back then with Ubuntu colors.
Whenever I logged into Vista, I was unhappy about it, there were tons of things opening at boot and saying that there's an update for Java and Windows and iTunes and virus scanner and firewall and everything. It even made me take a screenshot of the mess that was my desktop straight from the boot. When I logged into Ubuntu, it was so soothing. It was Gnome 2 with a brownish coloring made by Ubuntu and nothing gave me any messages about anything, it was so quiet and clean and simple looking.
Gnome 3 ruined that for me a bit, it wasn't the same anymore and all the quick modifications were disabled and hidden. Now I use XFCE.
I think a good UI today has a dock of some sort, which has large icons for programs. Just like OS X and Ubuntu are doing, and Windows 7. Large icons are faster than text to figure out what the program is and if it's only an icon it doesn't take too much space either. This may not be for everyone but my opinion is that it's the best way to show programs. I don't like the combination of small logos and text on the side.
>I think a good UI today has a dock of some sort
Please no. What pisses me off about docks is that there's a blurry distinction between what's open and what's just hanging around waiting to be opened. I was annoyed when Windows 7 came out and quickstart had been replaced with pinning, although quickstart does still exist (make a favorites directory in the right place and add it to the taskbar).
There are Linux distros with it pre-installed now, too. But they're still not daily driver-worthy.
It was THE face of UNIX, very utilitarian. Obviously not for everyone but to me it's a "so-shitty-it's-good" kind of thing.
nothing's really changed in GUIs since the mid 1990s, if you were old enough or knew enough about technology to have actually used those old, early forerunners of modern interfaces you would already know this
>Sure, lets go back to CGA mode GUIs on our IBM PC AT with 640kb of RAM! Or better yet, lets go back to CLI all the time. When your prompt is .>_ You'd need a text book on how to boot the damn computer and get it to do something. Then we could go back to programs stored on a 360k floppies or casette tapes.
kek, I love it when consumerist kiddos on /g/ try to look knowledgeable about old shit, I know you're baiting but you really could at least try
straight fvwm is usually what I use
I used that in highschool once, I felt so deep and interesting :^)
That's just one of the commercial Unices, though. The True O.G. Thompson+Ritchie+Pike Research Unix was the Blit one. Also managed to escape a lot of the BSD/AT&T brain damage like 1,000,000 signals, Berkeley sockets, and X11.
>I always wondered what windowing system the older '80s Unix systems used, noice.
Predating the X Window System, there was also CMU Andrew, SunView (successor called OPEN LOOK ran on X), and NeWS.
>That's just one of the commercial Unices, though.
you what? it ran on a large variety of commercial Unices like Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, etc.
I think the only one of the big UNIX players I can think of that wasn't using it in the '90s was SGI (but I could always be wrong)
Interesting. I've seen SunView before, actually I think I probably have some SPARCStations out in the garage with it, not familiar with those other two however.
>Interesting. I've seen SunView before, actually I think I probably have some SPARCStations out in the garage with it, not familiar with those other two however.
Pre-X UNIX GUIs are hard to find documentation on.
Here is one on Andrew: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~AUIS/ljdocs/mkmost/welcome.html
And NeWS: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?NetworkExtensibleWindowSystem
NeWS actually shares a lot in common with NeXTSTEP, as in they both follow the object-oriented model and render shit in PostScript. Pic related, from the documentation for the SPARC version of HyperTIES, a presentation program from University of Maryland (http://hcil2.cs.umd.edu/trs/89-13/89-13.html)
I like the old look better than the new flashy look. Here's my current desktop. Using the xfce-basic gtk theme.
Pic: FVWM circa June 1996
Doom, music, video player, email, editor, terminal. What more does one need?
Also, awesome old GUI showcase links:
That's some cool shit, thanks m8
this is why I love these kinds of threads
not bad, I usually use a similar color scheme myself
I like to rice mine to look more like a modernized CDE though because I'm a hipster
I know you already linked it, but the fvwm configs on here are top kek, I'll have to try a couple out some day.
Why do people like taskbars so much? Displaying everything is impossible since it they only cover a small portion of the screen. When I need an overview of what is running I toss the cursor in the corner so I can see all windows or use a hotkey to see all windows in relation to what desktop they are on. On any other given time I should just see the windows in front of me.
Can anyone give me a scenario where a taskbar is useful?
>xfce will never look like a gaudy as shit CDE ripoff ever again
pretty erect tbh
When you don't multitask a shit ton and you're used to the Windows environment I find them plenty useful
I was never much for hotkeys, don't really know why
But it displays the most important information. The icon tells you what application it is, and the text what the application is doing. Also a very good place for application shortcuts, clock, tray, application menu and so on. It's good for displaying information that you want to be accessible at all time.
Don't post that. The pinstripe OS Xes were ugly as sin. Much worse than everything that came beforehand or afterwards. I can't believe anyone thought OS X 10.0-10.2 looked good.
>random pointless transparency
>overly glossy photoshop-effect-looking blobs of colour on everything
>strong dark shadows that make the window buttons look off-center
>that fucking pinstripe background on absolutely everything
Platinum was perfect though. Mac OS 8 and 9 (and 7 with Appearance Manager) were the best looking.
Can you name an application that doesn't display that information? I mean if you have the window open and it takes up 90% of the screen why not look at that instead of the taskbar?
It seems that it is useful if you multitask in the sweetspot of too many windows/desktop and not so much you would want a full screen overview.
I still like the more minimal look of System 7 and before, Platnium is breddy good though.
GTK Theme - Classico, or "Classic Platinum Streamlined" if it is buggy in your GTK version
Xfwm4 - PlatiNomNom
Did OpenSolaris use the Java Desktop System? (yeah, it's GNOME, but whatever)
Install Debian jessie. But you can ask yourself if you want to use the tint2 panel or something else. I personally use the lxpanel because it has everything I need and uses the gtk theme.
>there's a blurry distinction between what's open and what's just hanging around waiting to be opened.
I agree 100%. Docks are plain stupid. Another big problem is that application launchers also suck. Take Gnome 3's clusterfuck of an app launcher. It's worse than the stuff you see on mobile phones.
>Large icons are faster than text to figure out what the program is
Only if you've very familiar with the icons and are running only a few programs. Once you start running a lot of stuff and using new programs often, you'll feel like taking the "dock" and shredding its sorry bitmaps because its a pain in the ass.
If you dislike the present so much, why not just virtualize an old linux distribution or version of windows, set it to run a clean copy on each boot, run a modern release of seamonkey, and use external storage for your files?
I still like Crux as a window decoration, it's stylish.
solid icons, crisp indow borders...
ALL THAT XP GLOSS SHIT NIGGER WHAT ARE YOU NIGGING
I love that theme, if they could make one based on this design for the whole system it would e sexy as hell.
thought it was Windows 8 or 10 from the thumbnail
fuckl the rounded edges, square is clean as fuck. Another Apple fuckup was to ditch this theme.
Nostalgia just kicked in.
>using moricons.dll for that MS DOS icon.
So I wasn't the only one...
I wish it supported xcursors like gnome2/xfce4
it only seems to support those simple static bitmap cursors
with CTWM it seems to support workspaces
isnt good GUIs the topic? i find xfce to give me a nearly perfect and traditional interface as well.
usually not with the defaults but thats as its up to the distributor of each distribution
despite being french, y-you're OK
Well you can just download the real IBM OS/2 Warp
I think IBM realizes that they aren't going to make much more money off of it any more.