You're viewing a single thread.
The Windows 98 UI was the pinnacle of desktop computing.
I'd vote for Windows 2000, but the point stands. All it needed (in hindsight) was virtual desktops
I'm a Linux user and I'm so tempted to use Chicago95 as my every day theme. Ironically, of course...
For some reason the Start button got so bad I went from using it to run everything to actively avoid it and just run everything using... Everything, the software.
I was 13 when Windows '95 came out. And there was so much hype around it. There were commercials on TV and newspapers and radio - seriously everywhere. And I remember using it for the first time and being so excited and then thinking "...stfw? How is this different than 3.1?" And realizing the OS doesn't really mean anything. But then we got a gateway with a gaming package a few months later, and that blew my nips off pretty good.
I don't even care if it looks more modern. I just want a consistent UI in Windows.
Don't worry, I'm sure with Windows 12 they will have a new UI design that fixes all the problems with the Metro interface. It wont replace it of course, it will just be another UI standard.
They already did that Metro (Windows 8) was replaced by Fluent (Windows 10 and 11).
It wont replace it of course, it will just be another UI standard.
That’s the great thing about standards, there’s just so many of them!
I love how you can find ui from every windows version in even the newest stuff. To be fair, I dont envy microsofts position - developing an OS that gets used on modern devices to old industrial PCs cant be easy to update
Amen to that. Not sure what the heck happened over the last 25 years.
It was actually the result of quite a lot of research and analysis of human machine interaction. Then we let “pretty” take over “functional”