4 ms·

I've always been surprised at how flat and grey NeXTStep was. Jobs was famously all about design and visuals yet NeXT is easily one of the ugliest operating sys

I've always been surprised at how flat and grey NeXTStep was. Jobs was famously all about design and visuals yet NeXT is easily one of the ugliest operating systems out there. Both Win 3.11 and MacOS had more color. And then of course OS X focused heavily on beautiful icons and artwork. What happened at NeXT that its UI worked out so differently?

dragonwriter 4y ago
> What happened at NeXT that its UI worked out so differently? The original NeXT cube, at which most of the investment in UI design was directed, was a high-resolution (for the time) grayscale system; color NeXT systems and NeXTStep on 3rd party hardware came later. So,NeXT’s UI elements from the beginning leaned heavily on detail (and, IIRC, animation), rather than color.
kristopolous 4y ago
really? You need to recalibrate your aesthetics. Here's GEM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(desktop_environment)#/media/File:IBM_PC_GEM.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(desktop_environment)#/med... Windows 2: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/86/Aldus_Pagemaker_on_Windows_2.0.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/86/Aldus_Pagemak... Risc OS: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/AcornArthur110desktopsmall.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/AcornArthur11... Amiga: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Amiga_Workbench_1_3_large.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Amiga_Workben... NextStep: http://toastytech.com/guis/ns08dock.png http://toastytech.com/guis/ns08dock.png You could say that's the ugliest in the same way you can have whatever opinion you want ... I don't think you'd have a lot of people agreeing with you though. As a disclaimer I think the modern Apple interfaces feel like a blaring pop music video when you have a headache ... so take it as you will.
eesmith 4y ago
The original hardware was grayscale, including the NeXTcube Berners-Lee used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT_MegaPixel_Display https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT_MegaPixel_Display > The original MegaPixel Display was a monochrome 17" monitor displaying 4 brightness levels (black, dark gray, light gray and white) in a fixed resolution of 1120 x 832 at 92 DPI (just shy of a true megapixel at 931,840 total pixels) at 68 Hz I believe NeXT wanted the higher resolution, to display a full page on a screen, more than they wanted color. Having both would have been very expensive. It wasn't until the NeXTstation Color that NeXT hardware included color. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXTstation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXTstation informs me the NeXTstation/Turbo had 256 KB VRAM for 4 colors (black, white and two shades of gray), and the NeXTstation Color/Turbo Color had 1.5 MB VRAM for 4,096 colors (12-bit). It adds that the grayscale NeXTstation was US$4,995 (equivalent to $10,400 in 2021) and the color one was US$7,995 (equivalent to $16,600 in 2021). By comparison, in 1990, https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_ii/specs/mac_iifx.html https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_ii/specs/mac_iifx.htm... informs me "The Macintosh IIfx can support multiple displays -- originally at great cost -- using multiple video cards in NuBus expansion slots. The Macintosh IIfx also can support multiple resolutions, 512x384 and 640x480 are common. Portrait (vertical orientation) displays also were popular."
SeanLuke 4y ago
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think it's fair to say that NeXTSTEP is considered to be extraordinary for its time, and one of the most influential GUIs in history. When NeXTSTEP 0.8 came out in 1989, here's what it and some competitors looked like: NeXTSTEP 0.8: http://toastytech.com/guis/ns08.html http://toastytech.com/guis/ns08.html Windows 2.1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2.1x https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2.1x MacOS 6.0.4: https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/System_6.0.4 https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/System_6.0.4 The last version of NeXTSTEP was 4.x in 1996. Here's what it looked like compared to its competitors at the time: NeXTSTEP 4.x: https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/openstep42 https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/openstep42 Windows 95: https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/win95 https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/win95 MacOS wasn't quite 8 yet but we'll be nice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_8 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_8 Note that Windows 95 (and OS/2) had copied NeXTSTEP GUI elements wholesale, including the 3D styling, the design of many widgets, the close and miniaturize icons, etc. It was direct and unabashed theft. Of course NeXTSTEP had huge technological advances beyond just how its GUI looked, but that's what we're talking about. At any rate, I hope by this point that you are convinced that (1) when NeXTSTEP came out, its GUI styling was revolutionary, (2) by the time NeXT closed up shop, others were copying it rather openly, and (3) NeXTSTEP was still much better looking than they were. Fun fact: NeXTSTEP had live window dragging in version 0.8, in 1989. By the time NeXTSTEP ceased to exist as a product, Windows and MacOS still didn't have it.
- mike_hearn 4y ago
  OK, good points. I think my mental timeline for NeXT was a few years off. I was comparing the 1989 greyscale release with Windows 3.1, not Windows 2. I still think by 95 Microsoft and Apple had caught up and surpassed it though. NeXT had higher resolution icons but the rest of the look hadn't evolved at all. Maybe it's the shade of grey that does it, NeXT was a darker look than the others by the end.

dragonwriter 4y ago

> What happened at NeXT that its UI worked out so differently? The original NeXT cube, at which most of the investment in UI design was directed, was a high-resolution (for the time) grayscale system; color NeXT systems and NeXTStep on 3rd party hardware came later. So,NeXT’s UI elements from the beginning leaned heavily on detail (and, IIRC, animation), rather than color.

kristopolous 4y ago

really? You need to recalibrate your aesthetics. Here's GEM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(desktop_environment)#/media/File:IBM_PC_GEM.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(desktop_environment)#/med... Windows 2: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/86/Aldus_Pagemaker_on_Windows_2.0.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/86/Aldus_Pagemak... Risc OS: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/AcornArthur110desktopsmall.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/AcornArthur11... Amiga: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Amiga_Workbench_1_3_large.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e4/Amiga_Workben... NextStep: http://toastytech.com/guis/ns08dock.png http://toastytech.com/guis/ns08dock.png You could say that's the ugliest in the same way you can have whatever opinion you want ... I don't think you'd have a lot of people agreeing with you though. As a disclaimer I think the modern Apple interfaces feel like a blaring pop music video when you have a headache ... so take it as you will.

eesmith 4y ago

The original hardware was grayscale, including the NeXTcube Berners-Lee used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT_MegaPixel_Display https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT_MegaPixel_Display > The original MegaPixel Display was a monochrome 17" monitor displaying 4 brightness levels (black, dark gray, light gray and white) in a fixed resolution of 1120 x 832 at 92 DPI (just shy of a true megapixel at 931,840 total pixels) at 68 Hz I believe NeXT wanted the higher resolution, to display a full page on a screen, more than they wanted color. Having both would have been very expensive. It wasn't until the NeXTstation Color that NeXT hardware included color. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXTstation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXTstation informs me the NeXTstation/Turbo had 256 KB VRAM for 4 colors (black, white and two shades of gray), and the NeXTstation Color/Turbo Color had 1.5 MB VRAM for 4,096 colors (12-bit). It adds that the grayscale NeXTstation was US$4,995 (equivalent to $10,400 in 2021) and the color one was US$7,995 (equivalent to $16,600 in 2021). By comparison, in 1990, https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_ii/specs/mac_iifx.html https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_ii/specs/mac_iifx.htm... informs me "The Macintosh IIfx can support multiple displays -- originally at great cost -- using multiple video cards in NuBus expansion slots. The Macintosh IIfx also can support multiple resolutions, 512x384 and 640x480 are common. Portrait (vertical orientation) displays also were popular."

SeanLuke 4y ago

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I think it's fair to say that NeXTSTEP is considered to be extraordinary for its time, and one of the most influential GUIs in history. When NeXTSTEP 0.8 came out in 1989, here's what it and some competitors looked like: NeXTSTEP 0.8: http://toastytech.com/guis/ns08.html http://toastytech.com/guis/ns08.html Windows 2.1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2.1x https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_2.1x MacOS 6.0.4: https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/System_6.0.4 https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/System_6.0.4 The last version of NeXTSTEP was 4.x in 1996. Here's what it looked like compared to its competitors at the time: NeXTSTEP 4.x: https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/openstep42 https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/openstep42 Windows 95: https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/win95 https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/win95 MacOS wasn't quite 8 yet but we'll be nice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_8 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_8 Note that Windows 95 (and OS/2) had copied NeXTSTEP GUI elements wholesale, including the 3D styling, the design of many widgets, the close and miniaturize icons, etc. It was direct and unabashed theft. Of course NeXTSTEP had huge technological advances beyond just how its GUI looked, but that's what we're talking about. At any rate, I hope by this point that you are convinced that (1) when NeXTSTEP came out, its GUI styling was revolutionary, (2) by the time NeXT closed up shop, others were copying it rather openly, and (3) NeXTSTEP was still much better looking than they were. Fun fact: NeXTSTEP had live window dragging in version 0.8, in 1989. By the time NeXTSTEP ceased to exist as a product, Windows and MacOS still didn't have it.

mike_hearn 4y ago
OK, good points. I think my mental timeline for NeXT was a few years off. I was comparing the 1989 greyscale release with Windows 3.1, not Windows 2. I still think by 95 Microsoft and Apple had caught up and surpassed it though. NeXT had higher resolution icons but the rest of the look hadn't evolved at all. Maybe it's the shade of grey that does it, NeXT was a darker look than the others by the end.