Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002 • Hacker News Board

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#161

Post by apricot » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:08 PM UTC

weland wrote: post #16

72deluxe wrote: post #12

I really liked these. This makes me feel old. I look at those desktops (particularly the Windows 95 one) and think they look clean and neat, with few distractions. I also know that they ran speedily on rubbish hardware. After ditching my BBC B (I was poor), I remember using Win 3.1 on a 386SX with 4MB RAM that someone had thrown out and installing software to take over program manager and make it look like Win95 beca…

> This makes me feel old. I look at those desktops (particularly the Windows 95 one) and think they look clean and neat, with few distractions. They also look like someone tried to come up with their own ideas. Everything today is flat, sketchy, inexpressive and boring. > How I miss Netscape, the feeling of discovering something new in computers that made you go "wow" (IE4 and DHTML), or the feeling of "this is reall…

> the joy of getting X to run

I think you mean "the joy of having X finally running". The actual "getting it to run" part was pretty much the polar opposite of joy.

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#162

Post by glenntzke » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:10 PM UTC

I find it interesting how often the phrase "[my desktop] is pretty boring" is said in a nearly shameful manner. These people that were producing content with their computers that was anything but boring (in the practical, effective sense) still felt that their screenshots lacked mystique and beauty.

Well, then there's CmdrTaco's desktop :3

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#163

Post by broken » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:18 PM UTC

veb wrote: post #160

Is it just me or was I the only one who saw how awesome this is: http://unix.se/ Here's the screengrab http://share.veb.nz/1UD8UE6 in case you guys don't see it... I think it's awesome. I want it! Definitely gonna update my 404 pages, heh.

I enjoyed it, too! It reminded me of the Sburb loading screen from Homestuck: http://www.mspaintadventures.com/?s=6&p=002037

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#164

Post by smegger001 » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:20 PM UTC

glass- wrote: post #148

tjr wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As of a few months ago, he has been browsing the web (sometimes) using IceCat and Tor. https://stallman.org/stallman-computing.html

I wonder if he realises that browsing over Tor with IceCat will be causing him to have quite a distinct browser fingerprint. He should just use Tor Browser.

He could just be changing his user agent to normalize it.

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#165

Post by vessenes » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:22 PM UTC

hoorayimhelping wrote: post #52

Bouncingsoul1 wrote: post #25

"Richard Stallman, july 2002: I don’t know how to make a screenshot, because I normally use my computer in text-mode." Classic RMS

aloof, self-centered, unhelpful. Classic.

I'd go with 'honest' and 'blunt'.

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#166

Post by tremendo » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:30 PM UTC

No green-on-black terminals? So disappointed.

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#167

Post by jdcarter » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:35 PM UTC

72deluxe wrote: post #12

I really liked these. This makes me feel old. I look at those desktops (particularly the Windows 95 one) and think they look clean and neat, with few distractions. I also know that they ran speedily on rubbish hardware. After ditching my BBC B (I was poor), I remember using Win 3.1 on a 386SX with 4MB RAM that someone had thrown out and installing software to take over program manager and make it look like Win95 beca…

I saw a demo of BeOS at MacWorld (Jan 1996 I think) that blew my mind. The guy started a video playing. He started playing a 16-track audio arrangement. He opened a web browser and more. Flipping between apps, the video player never lagged, the audio never skipped, you could adjust the audio mix instantly... it's like that BeBox could do anything and everything, all at once.

And the hardware that BeBox was running: two PowerPC 603e's. This was not the powerful PowerPC of the era, it was the crummy, low-cost one. They ran at a measly 66MHz. BeOS could drive those things like nothing else, though, it was amazing.

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#168

Post by FireBeyond » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:38 PM UTC

72deluxe wrote: post #12

I really liked these. This makes me feel old. I look at those desktops (particularly the Windows 95 one) and think they look clean and neat, with few distractions. I also know that they ran speedily on rubbish hardware. After ditching my BBC B (I was poor), I remember using Win 3.1 on a 386SX with 4MB RAM that someone had thrown out and installing software to take over program manager and make it look like Win95 beca…

"then running FVWM, KDE1 (looked like CDE, how reassuring), GNOME1 (it's squishy), KDE2, 3.5 (perfection, everything was configurable) then going back to GNOME2 (it was simple), then abandoning it all after GNOME3 and KDE4 (hmmm a cashew) and going to OSX. All the Linux desktops I used in tandem with Windows XP and 7 to "keep my hand in" both markets."

The only thing 'disappointing' in this is you didn't/didn't mention countless attempts to get E(nlightenment) running. After an overnight compile, of course!

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#169

Post by TazeTSchnitzel » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:47 PM UTC

mangecoeur wrote: post #45

72deluxe wrote: post #12

I really liked these. This makes me feel old. I look at those desktops (particularly the Windows 95 one) and think they look clean and neat, with few distractions. I also know that they ran speedily on rubbish hardware. After ditching my BBC B (I was poor), I remember using Win 3.1 on a 386SX with 4MB RAM that someone had thrown out and installing software to take over program manager and make it look like Win95 beca…

> clean and neat Really? You miss that special "concrete gray and primary blue" feel? I think I used every MS operating system starting with DOS, and I miss exactly none of the "historic" interfaces. To the extent I get annoyed when institutional IT departments force you to use the "classic" theme on modern windows boxes ("It's faster!" - no, it isn't to any human perceptible degree, and I appreciate not having to st…

> interface design has moved foward in huge strides in the last decades, learning from mistakes

Windows's UI has changed little in two decades, and some of the changes have actually made things worse.

Windows 95 was the first and the last Windows version where Microsoft poured millions into making a super-accessible, usable and intuitive user interface based on actual user studies, and it showed.

Windows 98 brought totally-not-product-bundling "web integration" to try and convince the US Government that Internet Explorer was a feature, not a product. This is where the scourge of Active Desktop, HTML Help, the bloated 98+ shell and other things came from. The change in Windows Explorer paradigm might have been good, but it was also a "web integration" change and Microsoft's own research from 95 showed that the 95 model was the most intuitive, so I doubt the change would have helped usability.

ME/2000 (the desktop was the same) changed very little UI-wise. They gave things a nicer coat of paint, though.

XP added the Luna theme and a second column to the start menu. Vista made everything glossy and added search to the start menu. 7 reorganised the taskbar. These were improvements overall.

Windows 8 came along and added an entirely new desktop environment and very poorly connected it to the existing one, creating a frankenstein UI.

Windows 10 now fixes a little of the Windows 8 mess, but it's still a mess. There's several different popup menu styles. There's multiple scroll bar styles.

Re: Screenshots from developers and Unix people taken in 2002

#170

Post by TazeTSchnitzel » Thu, Oct 29, 2015, 5:51 PM UTC

72deluxe wrote: post #51

mangecoeur wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> clean and neat Really? You miss that special "concrete gray and primary blue" feel? I think I used every MS operating system starting with DOS, and I miss exactly none of the "historic" interfaces. To the extent I get annoyed when institutional IT departments force you to use the "classic" theme on modern windows boxes ("It's faster!" - no, it isn't to any human perceptible degree, and I appreciate not having to st…

In Windows it is a bit odd anyway, as anything drawn using GDI or GDI+ goes through the CPU. This includes the "classic" interface. For accelerated interfaces (Aero), the GPU is involved (but don't ask me how - perhaps someone could elaborate?), so on rubbish GPUs it may be slower than going through the CPU, perhaps? Windows should tell you that your computer is rubbish so won't attempt to use the Aero interface. If…

> but don't ask me how - perhaps someone could elaborate?

From Vista onwards, GDI draw calls are executed on the GPU on a per-window basis, then the individual windows are also composited together on the GPU.