Windows 96
61–70 of 332 posts
Re: Windows 96
#62Re: Windows 96
#63Re: Windows 96
#64These UIs definitely look outdated, but somehow they seem better than current Windows UIs. Not, sure if it's nostalgia or if there's something there.
The mere presence of buttons that look like buttons, and static text that looks like static text, is innumerably better than the "ambiguous text and icons floating in a sea of flat white/blackspace" that UIs today seem to mostly consist of.
Re: Windows 96
#65Re: Windows 96
#66Seems like if you were a deeply unusual person you could actually do some computing in here :) main thing missing is a browser.
Re: Windows 96
#67Re: Windows 96
#68I think this is the nicest one of these I've seen—seems to actually work in a non-superficial way, from the package manager, shell, system settings, chat app, "p3" ("pseudo peer-to-peer"), system backup (downloads filesystem contents as zip), to running Half-life Uplink or Doom. Seems like if you were a deeply unusual person you could actually do some computing in here :) main thing missing is a browser.
Re: Windows 96
#69These UIs definitely look outdated, but somehow they seem better than current Windows UIs. Not, sure if it's nostalgia or if there's something there.
When a product manager asks me to make something look more "modern" these days that usually ends up being code for flattening the UI by eliminating signifiers/affordances like button borders, link indicators, scroll bars, etc. I thought skeuomorphism was garish, but at least it provided the occasional helpful metaphor.
Re: Windows 96
#70Windows NT 4 was the pinnacle of usability (and sanity).
Naw. If you used NT4 then you probably used Windows 2000 as well, which was newer but still sane. The actual newest but good (by that same metric) to make it to the shelves was Server 2003, but you had to enable certain desktop features and disable certain server features to get a good workstation configuration.