If you want a pretty OS...

Started by
32 comments, last by Extrarius 18 years, 1 month ago
Quote:Original post by TalrothWhy aren't all these smart people working on our OS stuff actually working to make them BETTER!!!


Because it's hard to show the speed of an OS in a few screenshots.

Plus, the average consumer doesn't care about speed, they care about eye-candy, so nowadays eye-candy is the pretty much only way to attract the average computer user (read: non-geeks).

Though, there are exceptions to this rule: most of the non-geeks I know set their desktop resolutions quite low (or change the sizes of their icons and fonts), for some reason, and the geeks I know usually use maximum resolution (I consider desktop resolution to be eye-candy, I don't know if anyone else will). Anyone know why this is?

Oh, and also, the eye-candy is a way of showing progress. People wouldn't consider it progress if the latest and greatest OS running on the best and newest hardware looked exactly like it's predecessors from the late 90s.
Advertisement
Desktop resolution provides more workspace... I don't consider it eye candy.
BRING BACK THE BLACK (or at least something darker)
Trust me, if you don't have a dinosaur of a computer you will be able to run any os without much of an issue..

Do you think microsoft or any os developer is stupid enough to eliminate millions of users from their marketbase because they want to give us a pretty os?

I don't think so..

Though they might come out with a downgraded version for that market :D
----------------------------------------------------------Rating me down will only make me stronger.----------------------------------------------------------
I was hoping this thread was gonna give me steps to make my OS pretty... [depressed]
I don't get it. Please elaborate on what, exactly, the webcam is supposed to do in this theoretical scenario. As best I can figure, it's supposed to put a picture of my room on a button.

CM
Quote:Original post by Thevenin
I was hoping this thread was gonna give me steps to make my OS pretty... [depressed]
Eh, I don't see why not. Teh Awesomeness that is XPero. And it's free!
SlimDX | Ventspace Blog | Twitter | Diverse teams make better games. I am currently hiring capable C++ engine developers in Baltimore, MD.
Quote:Original post by Talroth
I find it rather sad that the OS alone can't even be run on the first computer I had (old 100mhz box) Why is this sad? Because there is no REAL ADVANCEMENT! I'm on a computer that is so much 'better' than that old thing, but I'm not actually getting work done faster. It doesn't let me type reports faster, it doesn't really let me browse the web faster. Why aren't all these smart people working on our OS stuff actually working to make them BETTER!!!


We call this the 90/10 rule. Move to NT4? It's more secure and stable? But it looks exactly the same as Win95...

That is, 90% of the work impresses 10% of the people, and 10% of the work (the shiny, or ugly, GUI) impresses 90% of the people.
Quote:Original post by BBB
Quote:Original post by Servant of the Lord
The XP theme isn't too ugly.

Yes it is. Slimegreen start-button on annoying blue taskbar, hello?

Yes, the Blue theme is ugly, but the Silver theme is quite nice. It should have been the default, but taking 10 seconds to switch to it doesn't hurt that much.
_______________________________________Pixelante Game Studios - Fowl Language
I believe I had this idea when I was about ten years old, actually, only for sphere maps in games rather than in operating systems.

That aside, I'm all for having a good-looking skin. I always like to have some kind of really weird theme or another. Lately I've been going for more minimalist themes, but I still can't stand any of the built-in themes (Mac OS X has the only one I find tolerable, but I even got bored with that pretty quickly.)
-~-The Cow of Darkness-~-
Quote:
I want something that lets me get work DONE, not something that looks 'pretty' and slows my work down. There was a time when I would use the mouse for everything and that, clicking menus. However, now I'm noticing that on any system, there is a small delay between clicking, and the whole menu appearing. Now, to some that minor delay is nothing, however when I'm doing stuff I start to notice it.

Why do so many people assume that a pretty GUI and a functional GUI are exclusive? Windows XP is just as efficient to work in as Windows 95 was, despite looking better. If the pause before a menu shows up bothers you, then don't use menus. God hated that pause too, that's why he invented keyboard shortcuts. Navigating Windows Explorer takes too long? Type your destination directly into the address bar. There are one or two places its taken steps back [search dog, I'm looking at you], but otherwise its exactly the same.
Quote:
I find it rather sad that the OS alone can't even be run on the first computer I had (old 100mhz box) Why is this sad? Because there is no REAL ADVANCEMENT! I'm on a computer that is so much 'better' than that old thing, but I'm not actually getting work done faster. It doesn't let me type reports faster, it doesn't really let me browse the web faster. Why aren't all these smart people working on our OS stuff actually working to make them BETTER!!!

What do you want it to do? Last I checked, the speed of browsing the web depended on your internet browser, and report writing was a function of the author. Windows has improved things like its scheduler so that multiple threads run better, but you don't notice that when writing reports because you're the bottleneck, not the scheduler.

CM

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement