11 ms·

Creating Windows XP Icons (2001)

178 points by richev 8y ago

richev 8y ago
Luna[0] looks pretty dated to my eyes, but I'd gladly switch back to the Windows XP icon style. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_visual_styles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_visual_styles
- hambos22 8y ago
  Ah Royal Noir! I remember those days, my friends were pimping their bikes and I was pimping my desktop. I had to find Royal Noir on the internet because it wasn't embedded with XP, and with each download, one virus gift :D
- 2bitencryption 8y ago
  you knew you were dealing with a pro when they had "royale blue" or "royale noir". That was like hot-rod mode.
nexuist 8y ago
Maybe this is just me, but does anyone else think the XP design is timeless? Maybe it's because I grew up with it, but looking at these icons....it's not ugly. The interface strikes a good balance between skeuomorphism and unique digital design that I feel is missing from all of today's UI designs. I don't know. I think XP looks nice, even compared to today's standards.
- jchw 8y ago
  I like the XP Royale theme better than the original, but that absolutely still holds up today in my opinion.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - shezh 8y ago
    My favourite was Zune, but I don't remember when they bundled it. http://cybernetnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/ZuneThemeLg.jpg http://cybernetnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/ZuneTheme...
    - Jaruzel 8y ago
      They never did - you got it if you bought a Zune. There were additional (nicer than Luna) official themes with XP Tablet Edition, and XP Embedded as well.
      - TomMarius 8y ago
        There was XP Media Centre Edition which had it as default theme
      - fraencko 8y ago
        You could also download it for free from microsoft.com. It's still there: http://download.microsoft.com/download/e/a/9/ea9af5ae-b48e-473e-85fe-dcde7472e644/ZuneDesktopTheme.msi http://download.microsoft.com/download/e/a/9/ea9af5ae-b48e-4...
  - zyx321 8y ago
    Today I learned that there were other thenes. I installed every service pack, but I never got them so I just always used classic. Luna was just too bright for my taste.
  - kalleboo 8y ago
    I always loved the "Watercolor" theme from the beta. I was a Mac user and installed the Kaleidoscope knockoff of it
- walrus01 8y ago
  I mostly agree with you, and also think that KDE2 from around 2002-2003 was a high point in functional, low drag, low resource intensive BSD/Linux desktops. https://www.google.com/search?q=kde2+screenshots https://www.google.com/search?q=kde2+screenshots The closest I can get these days is a highly modified XFCE4 desktop.
- zapzupnz 8y ago
  I always thought it was hideous, but I liked that it stood apart from Mac OS X rather than copying it. I think the Royale theme was nicer than Luna and somewhat wish it had become the new theme from Service Pack 2 onwards. As for the icons, I liked them but they could look a bit unclear as to what they were supposed to represent. Windows ME's icons looked a bit clearer, but even those were styled a bit bizarrely to me: soft-rounded edges for icons that basically looked exactly liked the hard-edged Windows 95 icons. What I think were better than XP's icons themselves were XP-inspired icons that came out at the same time, bringing a bit of polish to icons that were still using only 16 colours in a 16x16 resolution.
  - Jaruzel 8y ago
    > I think the Royale theme was nicer than Luna Out of all the 'official' themes, my favourite was the Zune theme. Grey/Black with sprinkles of Orange. https://media.askvg.com/articles/images/Zune_Theme_XP.png https://media.askvg.com/articles/images/Zune_Theme_XP.png The default Zune wallpaper was bad though, so always changed that.
- CJKerr 8y ago
  The first computer I used had Windows 3.1, so I'm not sure if I "grew up with" XP.... but no, it looks super dated to me. The icons are OK, the rest of Luna is fairly ugly. There might be something to your theory, though - I think the Windows 2000 design still looks pretty good, although the colour palette is broadly too dark and saturated by modern standards. Perhaps we just get attached to the systems we remember liking.
  - eponeponepon 8y ago
    I don't think there's any perhaps about it - the visual surroundings of our childhood and youth will always have particular associations. FWIW, I've been stoically making every desktop I've used look as close as I can make it to the Windows 2000 desktop I had at university for years now.
    - qubex 8y ago
      I know what you mean: Windows 2000 ”looks like home” to me too.
      - andai 8y ago
        I installed W10 recently after years of not using Windows to see how things are. Discovered there's no classic theme and promptly uninstalled it.
  - toyg 8y ago
    This - nostalgia is a huge factor. However, I used OSX very little and still think their pre-Yosemite traditional skeuomorphic icons were the best ever. Other elements of their UI weren't good, but the icons were simply beautiful to work with.
- atoav 8y ago
  Timeless Design means something else: it doesn’t mean that a design looks nice even today, but it is used to describe designs that go beyond shorter lived trends. E.g. imagine modern furniture from the time around 1900 that looks as if it could have been designed today, in the 80s or in 20 years time. Windows XP doesn’t has a bad design, but it is almost certainly not timeless, alone for the color choice.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- xaldir 8y ago
  In my eyes Windows Classic is much better.
- geowwy 8y ago
  The theme from XP development builds was much more timeless. I wish they used that in XP. I would be happy still using that today.
- dsego 8y ago
  I started with Win 95/98, and compared to that, Win XP looked cartoony, like it is trying too hard to not scare off novice users.
  - ChrisRR 8y ago
    You have to remember that this was 2001. Back then using a computer was nowhere near as prevalent despite it only being 17 years ago. Microsoft and Apple had to do something to make computers more approachable and look less like they were only for the tech crowd.
    - oblio 8y ago
      Computers are still for the tech crowd, as smartphones prove :) After all, 1 billion computers out there and soon 6+ billion smartphones.
      - sneakernets 8y ago
        Yep. People are still scared of computers or see them as appliances. They never had a chance.
        AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
        There's good reasons for that. Computers are a tool, and for a long time hardly anyone really needed that tool. By the 90s they were becoming a pretty significant part of every business, so we started to see the proliferation of computers in a home office and applications geared toward enabling the user to use a computer more effectively as a tool. Then the internet happened. Now a lot of people were starting to own computers as a pure consumption device, a task for which it was never really the appropriate choice, just the only one. Consequently we started seeing the dumbing-down of everything, the locking away of "dangerous" functionality, the coddling, and the condescension. Then smartphones and tablets became the consumption device of choice, so desktop computers went back to being tools, right? Sadly no. Instead developers doubled down on the condescension and the locking down. Instead of trying to make computers into better tools again, they just try to make them more like smartphones. I got into computing because of the promise it represented as a personal tool to enhance lives, and now I loathe it for what it has become.
- squarefoot 8y ago
  Although I didn't grow up with that design I find it beautiful as well. To me it was the right balance between power and simplicity: every icon clearly shows its function and the system manages to pack lots of functionality without forcing users to jump around to find what they need. It matured into Win7, then tanked from Win8 and beyond because Microsoft wanted users to forget the desktop paradigm in favor of a mobile model.
- onion-soup 8y ago
  Exactly my thoughts. The whole aesthetics is obviously richer in XP than in any other windows. It just feels like it was from future, same feeling that Mac OS gives
- tbrock 8y ago
  The windows 2000 icons were much better and more timeless feeling to me imho.
- wodenokoto 8y ago
  That is very much just you. At the time it was considered plasticly and ugly, and "Fisher Price" still comes to mind when I look at the start menu, though I too have gotten very much used to the look of XP. It does have some bevels and shadows around buttons and boxes that I agree are missing in modern design, but that does make it timeless, just practical.
- enriquto 8y ago
  > Maybe this is just me, but does anyone else think the XP design is timeless? I have the same feeling but with windows 95 design. For me it is still the "default" design of widgets. The XP looks like a ridiculous plastic toy.
- handzbagz 8y ago
  I always hated it. I would switch to the 'classic' theme as soon as the PC booted.
- int_19h 8y ago
  Personally I hated the default look and feel back when it was released. It was screaming "plastic" all over, except for Luna Silver. Icons were less plasticky than the rest of it, but still meh. IMO, the timeless Windows look is Win2K - it's when they got the original Win95 / WinNT4 look perfect. They adjusted the colors a little bit so it was less dark, and IIRC that was also the first version to have sky blue wallpaper background by default, and blue gradient title bars. It was also the first to switch from MS Sans Serif to Tahoma 8pt for the UI font, and Tahoma was pretty much pixel perfect at that size. So the overall effect was that it looked more cheerful than Win9x, but not cartoonish. https://i.imgur.com/jwzJiSW.png https://i.imgur.com/jwzJiSW.png
  - brazzledazzle 8y ago
    I’m right there with you I think but for me it’s Win2K3. Not hugely different but there were enough UI changes to make it feel like peak Windows design. Superficially they might look pretty similar but I think it’s worth mentioning as a distinct product instead of lumping them together.
    - int_19h 8y ago
      Win2K3 was basically Win2K + XP icons, as I recall. I did the same thing in XP, always switching it to classic mode. Then later in Vista, and even in 7 for a while. Unfortunately it's gone in 8+...
      - zozbot123 8y ago
        "Windows Classic"-like widgets are also gone from GTK3 in Linux (whereas GTK2 still has its "Redmond" widget mode). Luckily the default 'Adwaita' theme is quite close in appearance, even more than what's now in Windows 8 or 10.
        jszymborski 8y ago
        You can similarly get MATE really close to the classic windows UI using the Redmond theme.
- GuB-42 8y ago
  I prefer the Windows 2000 style myself, at least when it comes to "timelessness". The issue I have with the XP style is the perspective, it is not consistent. Some icons are front facing, others have perspective, and it changes depending on the icon size. I mean, I think it is a nice style, and I agree with you when you mention the balance between skeuomorphism and unique digital design. But it may not be boring enough to become timeless.
- Aardwolf 8y ago
  The win95/win98/win2k default design is timeless imho, not the bright colored default xp one (in my eyes at least) P.S. I hate that no modern Linux desktop design has a proper distinction between selected and non selected window. They all only subtly change the text color on top of the window, no clear distinction like "blue is selected, gray is non selected window"
  - KozmoNau7 8y ago
    KDE with the default Breeze theme has good distinction between selected and nonselected Windows.
  - agumonkey 8y ago
    I'd add win3.x/OS2warp. There's something there too. It's super bare, but extremely friendly.
- pndy 8y ago
  > The interface strikes a good balance between skeuomorphism and unique digital design I've read many times people called it Fisher Price UI because how it resembled the colorful plastic used in kids toys. Personally I liked the default blue Luna until people figured out how to crack uxtheme.dll (which MS liked to patch back to its own defaults) and Visual Styles become a thing which opened the way to the real customization of Windows interface. Before Vista was released the greatest achievement of skinning community was releasing packages which were replacing default system bitmaps and often obsolete 9x graphical elements and giving in return the true visual integration. But there was also a price - system could be bricked once update was applied. The true skeuomorphism Microsoft has achieved in Vista - mostly with plexiglass-looking icons which flattened isometric variants are present today in Windows 10. Vista and 7 UI was more closer to OSX Aqua than XP's Luna was but today, both systems as well as Linux DE (notably KDE's Breeze) are following simplicity of semi-plastic flat simple interfaces. Still, in my opinion the Metro design of Windows 10 seems to be least pleasant among all current operating systems UI design but the weird announcement of Office new default icons (I assume there's nothing else to introduce in term of office suite features so new icons set is the way to show that developers do something) seem to previewing another change coming to Windows as an attempt to improve its UI look and feel. Even as some criticized already that these icons look similar to Google's in mockups presented on video, I think such change will do some good to all that Metro's silhouettes. As for last thing: there were attempts of porting OSX Aqua onto Windows in various Visual Styles, resources packages which obviously look ridiculous; even WindowsBlinds had own theme but not everyone knows that there were also people going the opposite way: https://i.imgur.com/wAm23tU.gif https://i.imgur.com/wAm23tU.gif
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
  Comparing to today's standards is a pretty low bar in my opinion. But I'm weird in that I actually really like the look of Win3. Besides, as others have mentioned, it's the Win95-Win2k style that's timeless.
- userbinator 8y ago
  I think all the icons up to Win7 were pretty good. It was 8+ that started the horrible "flat" trend for everything. It's not just icons and UI elements; all the general art at MS seems to have this bland lifeless style now. See https://blogs.business.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/azure-storage/2017/05/10-tips.jpg https://blogs.business.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/azur... and https://uploads.fireside.fm/images/0/04cfe804-4075-406f-9c32-fbcda8a35aec/Mg1vIbU0.png https://uploads.fireside.fm/images/0/04cfe804-4075-406f-9c32... for example. Even anime has more depth than that.
- scandox 8y ago
  As my old business partner used to say "All you need now is a disco ball"
- OnlyRepliesToBS 8y ago
  modern is terrible
- crazygringo 8y ago
  Kind of: there has rarely been an OS interface before or since that has been so consistent and clear. (The earlier System 7 is the only other one that comes to mind.) Yes, XP was plastic-y, cartoon-y, a little day-glo, verging on infantile. BUT: everything felt meticulously planned, logical, consistent, and easy-to-use. Everything felt like it was in it's "right" place. It was a triumph of UX for its time. Unlike today, where OS's tend to include a confusing mix of paradigms that are anything but consistent. E.g. on macOS, a totally confusing mix of UX skins ("traditional", iOS-inspired like Stocks and Voice Memos, skeumorphic dashboard widgets, old "dark" apps like GarageBand, new "dark" mode for all).
- combatentropy 8y ago
  > does anyone else think the XP design is timeless? Maybe it's because I grew up with it I think it's because you grew up with it. For me, the original Macintosh icons seem timeless. Really it's just nostalgia. Windows XP repels me, as does any other version of Windows, even Windows 10, though it is nearer my taste. This is because no Windows version was ever my computer as a child, when the nostalgia pixie dust is trapped in your heart. Instead I was a Mac user in the 80s and 90s, then switched to Linux. I had to use Windows many times, but it was always forced upon me, which does not help engender warm feelings. Furthermore Windows always seemed to me slow, flaky, clunky, bloated, and corrupt in all senses of the word. If I were to try to dissociate these feelings from the style of the icons, I still think they are not timeless. In fact it's quite the opposite, they look chintzy and faddish. Their colors are too garish, and there is too much detail. I like icons that are efficient, conveying information with a lightweight visual footprint, like the Reinhardt icons, https://store.kde.org/p/1120613/ https://store.kde.org/p/1120613/
- gfo 8y ago
  I don't disagree with you. However, though I've always been a die-hard Windows fan I thought OS X had much more beautiful icons that were essentially high-res images of what they represented. Of course, the difference is that these are illustrations so I still have an appreciation for these.
- Scene_Cast2 8y ago
  I remember using custom themes for XP back in the day. I think tornado5 was my favorite themer, his "Luna Element" and "Ambient" themes were pretty kickass. Unfortunately it looks like his deviantart account is deactivated, but there is plenty of screenshots around the web still.
  - andai 8y ago
    RIP uxtheme.dll
- agumonkey 8y ago
  I kinda agree with others, it's probably a lot due to fond memories. I didn't like it, I still don't really, but I like what it brings back. It's also the cutesy and end of a computing era where things were plastic, slightly round, large, playful. Just before MacOS X / iPhone wiped that era off. On the ergonomics and visual side I prefer simpler and leaner NT5 (which actually was in XP, just need to disable theming).
- HenryBemis 8y ago
  I think that for most of us this was our first long-lasting OS. I remember the flat Windows 3, the boring Win95 and Win98, the minimalist NT4 and Win2000. And then !!!BOOM!!! WinXP with that beautiful desktopn and colorful icons, and I think the overall experience makes us think fondly of that OS. Also the fact that XP was around for quite a few years, and we 'grew' up with it makes us remember it better. I will exclude Longhorn/Vista, because although the graphics were improved, the OS made for a horrible UX. Edit/Addition: nowadays nomatter what Win version I am using, I am stripping it down to a Win2000 look, no aero-crap, no fancy icons, no grouping of icons, etc. Oh and of course I stay away from Win10 :)
- pjmlp 8y ago
  I actually liked it and might have the articles on "Microsoft Systems Journal" about theme customization still stored somewhere.
WebDanube 8y ago
That entire page is just one giant trip down the memory lane. Kind of hard to digest how much of an impact XP had on the desktop OS scene, it's truly the gold standard imo. Vista's subsequent failure [0] only added to XP's rise. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLgRryt2ZtE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLgRryt2ZtE
peterburkimsher 8y ago
These are Mac icons, not Windows, but they're also small 32x32 pixel artwork. https://iconpush.github.io https://iconpush.github.io
neelkadia 8y ago
Man that 4-bit icon is legit!!!
LandR 8y ago
I wish Microsoft would redo the icons on Windows 10. I'm using the dark theme on Explorer, and the yellow folders just look odd.
theandrewbailey 8y ago
> Each Windows XP icon should contain these three color depths to support different monitor display settings: > 24-bit with 8-bit alpha (32-bit) > 8-bit (256 colors) with 1-bit transparency > 4-bit (16 colors) with 1-bit transparency This has been bugging me for a few years: when (and why) did we switch from measuring color depth as a total of all channels to measuring color depth as a single channel? When people talk about image and video formats today, "8-bit" means 8 bits per channel (presumably meaning 32 bits per pixel), not 256 colors total.
- sneakernets 8y ago
  We didn't switch at all. The problem is that people are confusing video cards with digital monitors and RAW image formats.
yreg 8y ago
It seems they were (at least partially) designed by IconFactory. They do cool icons to this day. https://design.iconfactory.com/microsoft-windows-xp/ https://design.iconfactory.com/microsoft-windows-xp/
cpburns2009 8y ago
Back when themes we're actually good. I started on Windows 3.1 as a kid. Every update from 3.1 through 7 was an improvement on the theme. After that it went downhill.

178 points by richev 8y ago

Luna[0] looks pretty dated to my eyes, but I'd gladly switch back to the Windows XP icon style. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_visual_styles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_visual_styles

hambos22 8y ago
Ah Royal Noir! I remember those days, my friends were pimping their bikes and I was pimping my desktop. I had to find Royal Noir on the internet because it wasn't embedded with XP, and with each download, one virus gift :D
2bitencryption 8y ago
you knew you were dealing with a pro when they had "royale blue" or "royale noir". That was like hot-rod mode.

nexuist 8y ago

Maybe this is just me, but does anyone else think the XP design is timeless? Maybe it's because I grew up with it, but looking at these icons....it's not ugly. The interface strikes a good balance between skeuomorphism and unique digital design that I feel is missing from all of today's UI designs. I don't know. I think XP looks nice, even compared to today's standards.

jchw 8y ago
I like the XP Royale theme better than the original, but that absolutely still holds up today in my opinion.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- shezh 8y ago
  My favourite was Zune, but I don't remember when they bundled it. http://cybernetnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/ZuneThemeLg.jpg http://cybernetnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/11/ZuneTheme...
  - Jaruzel 8y ago
    They never did - you got it if you bought a Zune. There were additional (nicer than Luna) official themes with XP Tablet Edition, and XP Embedded as well.
    - TomMarius 8y ago
      There was XP Media Centre Edition which had it as default theme
    - fraencko 8y ago
      You could also download it for free from microsoft.com. It's still there: http://download.microsoft.com/download/e/a/9/ea9af5ae-b48e-473e-85fe-dcde7472e644/ZuneDesktopTheme.msi http://download.microsoft.com/download/e/a/9/ea9af5ae-b48e-4...
- zyx321 8y ago
  Today I learned that there were other thenes. I installed every service pack, but I never got them so I just always used classic. Luna was just too bright for my taste.
- kalleboo 8y ago
  I always loved the "Watercolor" theme from the beta. I was a Mac user and installed the Kaleidoscope knockoff of it
walrus01 8y ago
I mostly agree with you, and also think that KDE2 from around 2002-2003 was a high point in functional, low drag, low resource intensive BSD/Linux desktops. https://www.google.com/search?q=kde2+screenshots https://www.google.com/search?q=kde2+screenshots The closest I can get these days is a highly modified XFCE4 desktop.
zapzupnz 8y ago
I always thought it was hideous, but I liked that it stood apart from Mac OS X rather than copying it. I think the Royale theme was nicer than Luna and somewhat wish it had become the new theme from Service Pack 2 onwards. As for the icons, I liked them but they could look a bit unclear as to what they were supposed to represent. Windows ME's icons looked a bit clearer, but even those were styled a bit bizarrely to me: soft-rounded edges for icons that basically looked exactly liked the hard-edged Windows 95 icons. What I think were better than XP's icons themselves were XP-inspired icons that came out at the same time, bringing a bit of polish to icons that were still using only 16 colours in a 16x16 resolution.
- Jaruzel 8y ago
  > I think the Royale theme was nicer than Luna Out of all the 'official' themes, my favourite was the Zune theme. Grey/Black with sprinkles of Orange. https://media.askvg.com/articles/images/Zune_Theme_XP.png https://media.askvg.com/articles/images/Zune_Theme_XP.png The default Zune wallpaper was bad though, so always changed that.
CJKerr 8y ago
The first computer I used had Windows 3.1, so I'm not sure if I "grew up with" XP.... but no, it looks super dated to me. The icons are OK, the rest of Luna is fairly ugly. There might be something to your theory, though - I think the Windows 2000 design still looks pretty good, although the colour palette is broadly too dark and saturated by modern standards. Perhaps we just get attached to the systems we remember liking.
- eponeponepon 8y ago
  I don't think there's any perhaps about it - the visual surroundings of our childhood and youth will always have particular associations. FWIW, I've been stoically making every desktop I've used look as close as I can make it to the Windows 2000 desktop I had at university for years now.
  - qubex 8y ago
    I know what you mean: Windows 2000 ”looks like home” to me too.
    - andai 8y ago
      I installed W10 recently after years of not using Windows to see how things are. Discovered there's no classic theme and promptly uninstalled it.
- toyg 8y ago
  This - nostalgia is a huge factor. However, I used OSX very little and still think their pre-Yosemite traditional skeuomorphic icons were the best ever. Other elements of their UI weren't good, but the icons were simply beautiful to work with.
atoav 8y ago
Timeless Design means something else: it doesn’t mean that a design looks nice even today, but it is used to describe designs that go beyond shorter lived trends. E.g. imagine modern furniture from the time around 1900 that looks as if it could have been designed today, in the 80s or in 20 years time. Windows XP doesn’t has a bad design, but it is almost certainly not timeless, alone for the color choice.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
xaldir 8y ago
In my eyes Windows Classic is much better.
geowwy 8y ago
The theme from XP development builds was much more timeless. I wish they used that in XP. I would be happy still using that today.
dsego 8y ago
I started with Win 95/98, and compared to that, Win XP looked cartoony, like it is trying too hard to not scare off novice users.
- ChrisRR 8y ago
  You have to remember that this was 2001. Back then using a computer was nowhere near as prevalent despite it only being 17 years ago. Microsoft and Apple had to do something to make computers more approachable and look less like they were only for the tech crowd.
  - oblio 8y ago
    Computers are still for the tech crowd, as smartphones prove :) After all, 1 billion computers out there and soon 6+ billion smartphones.
    - sneakernets 8y ago
      Yep. People are still scared of computers or see them as appliances. They never had a chance.
      - AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
        There's good reasons for that. Computers are a tool, and for a long time hardly anyone really needed that tool. By the 90s they were becoming a pretty significant part of every business, so we started to see the proliferation of computers in a home office and applications geared toward enabling the user to use a computer more effectively as a tool. Then the internet happened. Now a lot of people were starting to own computers as a pure consumption device, a task for which it was never really the appropriate choice, just the only one. Consequently we started seeing the dumbing-down of everything, the locking away of "dangerous" functionality, the coddling, and the condescension. Then smartphones and tablets became the consumption device of choice, so desktop computers went back to being tools, right? Sadly no. Instead developers doubled down on the condescension and the locking down. Instead of trying to make computers into better tools again, they just try to make them more like smartphones. I got into computing because of the promise it represented as a personal tool to enhance lives, and now I loathe it for what it has become.
squarefoot 8y ago
Although I didn't grow up with that design I find it beautiful as well. To me it was the right balance between power and simplicity: every icon clearly shows its function and the system manages to pack lots of functionality without forcing users to jump around to find what they need. It matured into Win7, then tanked from Win8 and beyond because Microsoft wanted users to forget the desktop paradigm in favor of a mobile model.
onion-soup 8y ago
Exactly my thoughts. The whole aesthetics is obviously richer in XP than in any other windows. It just feels like it was from future, same feeling that Mac OS gives
tbrock 8y ago
The windows 2000 icons were much better and more timeless feeling to me imho.
wodenokoto 8y ago
That is very much just you. At the time it was considered plasticly and ugly, and "Fisher Price" still comes to mind when I look at the start menu, though I too have gotten very much used to the look of XP. It does have some bevels and shadows around buttons and boxes that I agree are missing in modern design, but that does make it timeless, just practical.
enriquto 8y ago
> Maybe this is just me, but does anyone else think the XP design is timeless? I have the same feeling but with windows 95 design. For me it is still the "default" design of widgets. The XP looks like a ridiculous plastic toy.
handzbagz 8y ago
I always hated it. I would switch to the 'classic' theme as soon as the PC booted.
int_19h 8y ago
Personally I hated the default look and feel back when it was released. It was screaming "plastic" all over, except for Luna Silver. Icons were less plasticky than the rest of it, but still meh. IMO, the timeless Windows look is Win2K - it's when they got the original Win95 / WinNT4 look perfect. They adjusted the colors a little bit so it was less dark, and IIRC that was also the first version to have sky blue wallpaper background by default, and blue gradient title bars. It was also the first to switch from MS Sans Serif to Tahoma 8pt for the UI font, and Tahoma was pretty much pixel perfect at that size. So the overall effect was that it looked more cheerful than Win9x, but not cartoonish. https://i.imgur.com/jwzJiSW.png https://i.imgur.com/jwzJiSW.png
- brazzledazzle 8y ago
  I’m right there with you I think but for me it’s Win2K3. Not hugely different but there were enough UI changes to make it feel like peak Windows design. Superficially they might look pretty similar but I think it’s worth mentioning as a distinct product instead of lumping them together.
  - int_19h 8y ago
    Win2K3 was basically Win2K + XP icons, as I recall. I did the same thing in XP, always switching it to classic mode. Then later in Vista, and even in 7 for a while. Unfortunately it's gone in 8+...
    - zozbot123 8y ago
      "Windows Classic"-like widgets are also gone from GTK3 in Linux (whereas GTK2 still has its "Redmond" widget mode). Luckily the default 'Adwaita' theme is quite close in appearance, even more than what's now in Windows 8 or 10.
      - jszymborski 8y ago
        You can similarly get MATE really close to the classic windows UI using the Redmond theme.
GuB-42 8y ago
I prefer the Windows 2000 style myself, at least when it comes to "timelessness". The issue I have with the XP style is the perspective, it is not consistent. Some icons are front facing, others have perspective, and it changes depending on the icon size. I mean, I think it is a nice style, and I agree with you when you mention the balance between skeuomorphism and unique digital design. But it may not be boring enough to become timeless.
Aardwolf 8y ago
The win95/win98/win2k default design is timeless imho, not the bright colored default xp one (in my eyes at least) P.S. I hate that no modern Linux desktop design has a proper distinction between selected and non selected window. They all only subtly change the text color on top of the window, no clear distinction like "blue is selected, gray is non selected window"
- KozmoNau7 8y ago
  KDE with the default Breeze theme has good distinction between selected and nonselected Windows.
- agumonkey 8y ago
  I'd add win3.x/OS2warp. There's something there too. It's super bare, but extremely friendly.
pndy 8y ago
> The interface strikes a good balance between skeuomorphism and unique digital design I've read many times people called it Fisher Price UI because how it resembled the colorful plastic used in kids toys. Personally I liked the default blue Luna until people figured out how to crack uxtheme.dll (which MS liked to patch back to its own defaults) and Visual Styles become a thing which opened the way to the real customization of Windows interface. Before Vista was released the greatest achievement of skinning community was releasing packages which were replacing default system bitmaps and often obsolete 9x graphical elements and giving in return the true visual integration. But there was also a price - system could be bricked once update was applied. The true skeuomorphism Microsoft has achieved in Vista - mostly with plexiglass-looking icons which flattened isometric variants are present today in Windows 10. Vista and 7 UI was more closer to OSX Aqua than XP's Luna was but today, both systems as well as Linux DE (notably KDE's Breeze) are following simplicity of semi-plastic flat simple interfaces. Still, in my opinion the Metro design of Windows 10 seems to be least pleasant among all current operating systems UI design but the weird announcement of Office new default icons (I assume there's nothing else to introduce in term of office suite features so new icons set is the way to show that developers do something) seem to previewing another change coming to Windows as an attempt to improve its UI look and feel. Even as some criticized already that these icons look similar to Google's in mockups presented on video, I think such change will do some good to all that Metro's silhouettes. As for last thing: there were attempts of porting OSX Aqua onto Windows in various Visual Styles, resources packages which obviously look ridiculous; even WindowsBlinds had own theme but not everyone knows that there were also people going the opposite way: https://i.imgur.com/wAm23tU.gif https://i.imgur.com/wAm23tU.gif
AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y ago
Comparing to today's standards is a pretty low bar in my opinion. But I'm weird in that I actually really like the look of Win3. Besides, as others have mentioned, it's the Win95-Win2k style that's timeless.
userbinator 8y ago
I think all the icons up to Win7 were pretty good. It was 8+ that started the horrible "flat" trend for everything. It's not just icons and UI elements; all the general art at MS seems to have this bland lifeless style now. See https://blogs.business.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/azure-storage/2017/05/10-tips.jpg https://blogs.business.microsoft.com/wp-content/uploads/azur... and https://uploads.fireside.fm/images/0/04cfe804-4075-406f-9c32-fbcda8a35aec/Mg1vIbU0.png https://uploads.fireside.fm/images/0/04cfe804-4075-406f-9c32... for example. Even anime has more depth than that.
scandox 8y ago
As my old business partner used to say "All you need now is a disco ball"
OnlyRepliesToBS 8y ago
modern is terrible
crazygringo 8y ago
Kind of: there has rarely been an OS interface before or since that has been so consistent and clear. (The earlier System 7 is the only other one that comes to mind.) Yes, XP was plastic-y, cartoon-y, a little day-glo, verging on infantile. BUT: everything felt meticulously planned, logical, consistent, and easy-to-use. Everything felt like it was in it's "right" place. It was a triumph of UX for its time. Unlike today, where OS's tend to include a confusing mix of paradigms that are anything but consistent. E.g. on macOS, a totally confusing mix of UX skins ("traditional", iOS-inspired like Stocks and Voice Memos, skeumorphic dashboard widgets, old "dark" apps like GarageBand, new "dark" mode for all).
combatentropy 8y ago
> does anyone else think the XP design is timeless? Maybe it's because I grew up with it I think it's because you grew up with it. For me, the original Macintosh icons seem timeless. Really it's just nostalgia. Windows XP repels me, as does any other version of Windows, even Windows 10, though it is nearer my taste. This is because no Windows version was ever my computer as a child, when the nostalgia pixie dust is trapped in your heart. Instead I was a Mac user in the 80s and 90s, then switched to Linux. I had to use Windows many times, but it was always forced upon me, which does not help engender warm feelings. Furthermore Windows always seemed to me slow, flaky, clunky, bloated, and corrupt in all senses of the word. If I were to try to dissociate these feelings from the style of the icons, I still think they are not timeless. In fact it's quite the opposite, they look chintzy and faddish. Their colors are too garish, and there is too much detail. I like icons that are efficient, conveying information with a lightweight visual footprint, like the Reinhardt icons, https://store.kde.org/p/1120613/ https://store.kde.org/p/1120613/
gfo 8y ago
I don't disagree with you. However, though I've always been a die-hard Windows fan I thought OS X had much more beautiful icons that were essentially high-res images of what they represented. Of course, the difference is that these are illustrations so I still have an appreciation for these.
Scene_Cast2 8y ago
I remember using custom themes for XP back in the day. I think tornado5 was my favorite themer, his "Luna Element" and "Ambient" themes were pretty kickass. Unfortunately it looks like his deviantart account is deactivated, but there is plenty of screenshots around the web still.
- andai 8y ago
  RIP uxtheme.dll
agumonkey 8y ago
I kinda agree with others, it's probably a lot due to fond memories. I didn't like it, I still don't really, but I like what it brings back. It's also the cutesy and end of a computing era where things were plastic, slightly round, large, playful. Just before MacOS X / iPhone wiped that era off. On the ergonomics and visual side I prefer simpler and leaner NT5 (which actually was in XP, just need to disable theming).
HenryBemis 8y ago
I think that for most of us this was our first long-lasting OS. I remember the flat Windows 3, the boring Win95 and Win98, the minimalist NT4 and Win2000. And then !!!BOOM!!! WinXP with that beautiful desktopn and colorful icons, and I think the overall experience makes us think fondly of that OS. Also the fact that XP was around for quite a few years, and we 'grew' up with it makes us remember it better. I will exclude Longhorn/Vista, because although the graphics were improved, the OS made for a horrible UX. Edit/Addition: nowadays nomatter what Win version I am using, I am stripping it down to a Win2000 look, no aero-crap, no fancy icons, no grouping of icons, etc. Oh and of course I stay away from Win10 :)
pjmlp 8y ago
I actually liked it and might have the articles on "Microsoft Systems Journal" about theme customization still stored somewhere.

WebDanube 8y ago

That entire page is just one giant trip down the memory lane. Kind of hard to digest how much of an impact XP had on the desktop OS scene, it's truly the gold standard imo. Vista's subsequent failure [0] only added to XP's rise. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLgRryt2ZtE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLgRryt2ZtE

peterburkimsher 8y ago

These are Mac icons, not Windows, but they're also small 32x32 pixel artwork. https://iconpush.github.io https://iconpush.github.io

neelkadia 8y ago

Man that 4-bit icon is legit!!!

LandR 8y ago

I wish Microsoft would redo the icons on Windows 10. I'm using the dark theme on Explorer, and the yellow folders just look odd.

theandrewbailey 8y ago

> Each Windows XP icon should contain these three color depths to support different monitor display settings: > 24-bit with 8-bit alpha (32-bit) > 8-bit (256 colors) with 1-bit transparency > 4-bit (16 colors) with 1-bit transparency This has been bugging me for a few years: when (and why) did we switch from measuring color depth as a total of all channels to measuring color depth as a single channel? When people talk about image and video formats today, "8-bit" means 8 bits per channel (presumably meaning 32 bits per pixel), not 256 colors total.

sneakernets 8y ago
We didn't switch at all. The problem is that people are confusing video cards with digital monitors and RAW image formats.

yreg 8y ago

It seems they were (at least partially) designed by IconFactory. They do cool icons to this day. https://design.iconfactory.com/microsoft-windows-xp/ https://design.iconfactory.com/microsoft-windows-xp/

cpburns2009 8y ago

Back when themes we're actually good. I started on Windows 3.1 as a kid. Every update from 3.1 through 7 was an improvement on the theme. After that it went downhill.