5 ms·

Am I the only one who just wants their desktop to look like Windows 95 for the next 50 years? Except maybe a bit more bit depth and DPI. This design is simply u

by Kenji 9y ago

Am I the only one who just wants their desktop to look like Windows 95 for the next 50 years? Except maybe a bit more bit depth and DPI. This design is simply unsurpassed and everything new that comes out is a step back. There is one feature that I would like from modern Windows window manager though: I really like Windows 10's full-text search for settings.

maxxxxx 9y ago
I agree. Maybe I would take XP as the standard. But in the last 15 years I don't see much real improvement but just moving things around and making them look different.
chongli 9y ago
I would really like an OS as simple to use as MacOS 9 but with a modern filesystem, full text search, and keyboard shortcuts for switching apps. That's it. That would be fantastic. What made Classic MacOS so nice was that it was persistent. Each folder remembered where its window was, what size/shape, icon size settings, icon layout, sort/list view, coloured labels, etc. Human spatial memory is a fantastic thing. It's so frustrating that we've decided to throw that all away with modern UIs that don't persist anything and windows that get reused (browsers). It's no wonder non-technical users struggle so much that they've more or less given up on desktop PCs.
- JoBrad 9y ago
  I'm pretty sure Windows has had the ability to remember folder-specific settings since Windows 95. I don't know when window-sizing and location memory came into play, but it definitely worked in Windows 7+. Until Windows 7, if I remember correctly, folder-specific customization was all or nothing: every folder had individualized settings, or all folders were treated the same. The file-specific libraries (Documents, Videos, Pictures, etc) let you strike a balance between those two extremes (among other things).
  - chongli 9y ago
    It does, but it's not the default. The default in Windows is that you have a browser and opening folders reuses the same window. Classic Mac OS is not like this. Every folder has a 1 to 1 relationship with the window showing its contents. A folder cannot be open twice, and a window cannot change what folder is displayed inside it. Applications worked like this too. An application could only be open once. Trying to open it again would switch to it. The goal of all this is to help the user build spatial memory for everything on the computer. By not having applications, documents, or folders move around the screen of their own volition the user is better able to keep track of them. This mirrors a real-life desk where objects like papers, pens, folders, and your calculator can be found right where you left them. If every time you sat down at your desk those objects were rearranged you'd probably complain to the cleaning staff.

by Kenji 9y ago

maxxxxx 9y ago

I agree. Maybe I would take XP as the standard. But in the last 15 years I don't see much real improvement but just moving things around and making them look different.

chongli 9y ago

I would really like an OS as simple to use as MacOS 9 but with a modern filesystem, full text search, and keyboard shortcuts for switching apps. That's it. That would be fantastic. What made Classic MacOS so nice was that it was persistent. Each folder remembered where its window was, what size/shape, icon size settings, icon layout, sort/list view, coloured labels, etc. Human spatial memory is a fantastic thing. It's so frustrating that we've decided to throw that all away with modern UIs that don't persist anything and windows that get reused (browsers). It's no wonder non-technical users struggle so much that they've more or less given up on desktop PCs.

JoBrad 9y ago
I'm pretty sure Windows has had the ability to remember folder-specific settings since Windows 95. I don't know when window-sizing and location memory came into play, but it definitely worked in Windows 7+. Until Windows 7, if I remember correctly, folder-specific customization was all or nothing: every folder had individualized settings, or all folders were treated the same. The file-specific libraries (Documents, Videos, Pictures, etc) let you strike a balance between those two extremes (among other things).
- chongli 9y ago
  It does, but it's not the default. The default in Windows is that you have a browser and opening folders reuses the same window. Classic Mac OS is not like this. Every folder has a 1 to 1 relationship with the window showing its contents. A folder cannot be open twice, and a window cannot change what folder is displayed inside it. Applications worked like this too. An application could only be open once. Trying to open it again would switch to it. The goal of all this is to help the user build spatial memory for everything on the computer. By not having applications, documents, or folders move around the screen of their own volition the user is better able to keep track of them. This mirrors a real-life desk where objects like papers, pens, folders, and your calculator can be found right where you left them. If every time you sat down at your desk those objects were rearranged you'd probably complain to the cleaning staff.