Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 226 posts

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#171

Post by bigpeopleareold »

cies wrote: post #50

> for Linux Linux is a kernel and does have a graphical interface. This theme is for XFCE, one of the many "desktop environments" that can run on the Linux kernel. Other being: Gnome, Plasma (KDE), LXQt, and many more. To make it more interesting, XFCE also runs on FreeBSD (another open source kernel/OS).

Linux is the kernel for the XFCE operating system called formally XFCE/Linux :)

I saw this and clicked into it and then saw I can't use it without using XFCE.(well, only for kicks)

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#172

Post by winrid »

squarefoot wrote: post #48
ekianjo wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Windows 9x was slow because hard drives. Now we have SSDs and the desktop is slower than ever still.

Desktop became slow when windows and widgets became objects, as in the OOP sense. The transition from hardcoded primitives to objects that would be created and destroyed on the fly slowed things down a lot, but that is the price to pay to have code that runs on very different platforms, also adapting itself to different screen sizes and resolutions, dynamic objects, etc.

In C++ it would still be very fast. I doubt you'd notice the difference.

The turning point was MS switching to C# for everything. Now built in apps load slow because the code is not JIT compiled yet, and I bet other issues...

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#173

Post by winrid »

seabass-labrax wrote: post #141
soraminazuki wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how I remember it. Windows 9x was slow and constantly crashing. Booting and launching programs took ages. To be fair, the performance problems had more to do with the available hardware back then, but still.

My Intel Pentium 4 machine usually runs reliably and responsively, but you have to be careful: the default Windows picture viewer instantly freezes the PC if you click 'next image' before the current one has finished loading!

In XP it would be fine.

Are you running win10 on a P4? Madman :)

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#174

Post by troupo »

soraminazuki wrote: post #26
reacharavindh wrote: post #4

Not that I want the UX To _look_ like Windows 95, but I sure do feel nostalgic how fast and responsive the desktop “felt” back in those days. These days, it is a rarity to see a native app that is as responsive. It feels like all native apps burn through CPU cycles in cosmetic things and animations that it feels sluggish in comparison.

That's not how I remember it. Windows 9x was slow and constantly crashing. Booting and launching programs took ages. To be fair, the performance problems had more to do with the available hardware back then, but still.

Windows 2000 though... I think it was the pinnacle of Windows.

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#175

Post by gsich »

raffraffraff wrote: post #56
soraminazuki wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how I remember it. Windows 9x was slow and constantly crashing. Booting and launching programs took ages. To be fair, the performance problems had more to do with the available hardware back then, but still.

I had a carefully crafted 98SE CD that was created using a tool called (I think) 98lite. It let you remove components and set defaults. That was rock solid for me , and used so few resources. Boot times were very quick considering the hardware at the time. The all-important post-install defrag made a difference. I didn't switch away from 98SE on my home computer until XP SP2 (which I immediately theme to look like 98…

XP had a Classic theme from the beginning.

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#176

Post by jtode »

WesolyKubeczek wrote: post #97
TacticalCoder wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Back then about just anything was better looking than Windows 95. OS/2 was slick. Mac computers had a very enjoyable UI. SGI machines had a very good looking UI. But people mostly only knew Windows 95, so that's what they remember.

I would say that Win95 aesthetics was about someone with an actual good taste taking Motif and making it not suck. Remember how selecting menu items by hovering was BIG? Coming from Windows 3.1/3.11, the usability improvement of this alone was massive. Same with mouse wheel becoming ubiquitous, courtesy of Microsoft (they weren't the first, but it's thanks to them that everyone and their dog could actually make use o…

Thing about GTK and QT though, is they are extremely relevant in 2023. I use QT at work and as a nerd that reads spaces like this I hear those acronyms basically every day - conversely, other than these, we have all been saying names of things that essentially don't exist anymore.

Not here to fight, but I dunno, slow and steady wins the race I guess?

Also, don't be owned by capital lol.

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#177

Post by tsss »

ethbr0 wrote: post #74
mcny wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> windows didn't really get any more usable after that... The old UI is good but I am not a fan of the everything is folders and files idea of the start menu. Maybe I'm misremembering but iirc as a child I used to forget which sub menu inside the thing I needed was except for the ones I used frequently. I like being able to just type obs and press enter in the new windows. I preferred the old theme better than window…

> everything is folders and files idea of the start menu Your comment is Ribbon/magic-search-bar vs hierarchical-organization preference in a nutshell. I've decided there are two mutually-exclusive sorts of people: (a) those who want search to surface things for them, and hate having to remember where to find things & (b) those who want to remember where/how to find things, and hate relying on fuzzy search to surface…

I also prefer the ribbons, but a real power user of hierarchical menus doesn't click through them. The menus in Windows used to have the first character underlined: this is a shortcut. File->Save could be accessed with an incantation like Alt+fs. The real power of the old menus was remembering the discoverable shortcuts and flying through the menus without using mouse, somewhat similar to how Vim works.

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#178

Post by rob74 »

wanderingstan wrote: post #49
soraminazuki wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not how I remember it. Windows 9x was slow and constantly crashing. Booting and launching programs took ages. To be fair, the performance problems had more to do with the available hardware back then, but still.

Hard to believe that a few system crashes per day was the norm. You just hoped you hadn’t lost too much, would re-boot and go get a drink while you waited. Due to that “training” I still hit CTRL-S obsessively even when it hasn’t been needed for years.

Contrast that to today, when you have editors like Sublime Text which will reliably keep your editor tabs (or "buffers") around for as long as you need them, even if you never save them (yourself - of course the editor does that behind the scenes).

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#179

Post by tommica »

troad wrote: post #25

I'm a big fan of this aesthetic. If you appreciate the usability of W95 without needing a pixel perfect copy, it's very easy to theme KDE to strike a really good balance. As your global theme, use 'Reactionary'. Set your application style to 'MS Windows 9x'. For your icons, use 'Memphis98'. For cursors, 'Hackneyed (scaleable)'. Your Plasma style, colours, and window decorations should all follow your global theme (Re…

This is a hail mary, but would there be something similar for getting the Win XP look? I'd love that

Re: Chicago95 – Windows 95 Theme for Linux

#180

Post by adrian_b »

lelanthran wrote: post #169
ShadowBanThis01 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this objection. The Start menu (which was a step backward from Program Manager) really went downhill when it obscured or removed the ability to group your programs into folders. Why do I want my audio & music programs jumbled together with my development tools? Or my graphics programs mixed in with general office apps? People who argue that you should just type into a search bar 100% of the time to…

> People who argue that you should just type into a search bar 100% of the time to find and launch apps are naíve. First of all, unless you have a trivial number of applications, it's absurd to expect everyone to remember the name of every program on his computer. Oh gee, what was that SD-card-formatting utility again? I don't know, but hey in two clicks I'm in my Utils folder and there it is. Maybe you should relook…

Typing something like "SD Card" takes too much time in comparison with launching an application from a hierarchical menu using less key presses (or mouse movements/clicks).

In most cases, when you have to type something longer than "SD Card", the difference in launching speed is even greater.

Post reply on HN