13 ms·

Windows XP 2024 Edition is everything I want from a new OS

233 points by accrual 3y ago

airstrike 3y ago
I don't know, this feels like the worst parts of Windows XP (Fisher Price UI), with an annoying setup workflow, and a Microsoft account tie in... not exactly what I'd like to have today
- Levitz 3y ago
  I'll take the consistency of a "Fisher Price UI" over the absolute current horror any day.
  - accrual 3y ago
    Especially since the classic theme was still available. XP with the classic theme wasn't too dissimilar from the proceeding Windows 2000. Much more professional UI.
steve1977 3y ago
Actually, just Windows XP. Or Windows 7. With security updates, but no GUI “improvements”. With PowerShell though.
tims33 3y ago
It feels even clunkier now in this video than it did when it came out.
- dewey 3y ago
  That video somehow mashes together Windows Vista and XP design elements which makes it look a bit odd.
sircastor 3y ago
One of the biggest challenges modern OS developers face (Apple and Microsoft namely) is how to make the new version of the OS appealing enough for users to move to. There are carrots like a fancy new feature, or sticks like “we’re not supporting this anymore, so if you want your computer to be secure you need to upgrade.” A lot of people don’t care about the carrots though. Their computer does everything they need it to and does so reliably. In a lot of ways the OS is a solved problem, but the companies who make them still need to pay the bills for all the security work that will always need to be done. It makes me wonder if Apple (for example) put macOS into a no-new-features mode and just improved security from here-on-out what the long term effects would be for users and the industry.
- noqc 3y ago
  >need to pay the bills for all the security work that will always need to be done This is in no way the business incentive of a major OS, and you've painted an extraordiarily rosy picture of OS development.
  - Lazonedo 3y ago
    Yes. Microsoft has already reached the user peak of their market, there cannot be anymore growth just from the OS alone, so the point of the OS isn't to be a good OS anymore, but to be a platform to sell you other things: AI (copilot integration), cloud services (onedrive integration, xbox game pass etc), advertisement (bundled crapware like candy crush that Windows 10 used to automatically install) and so on. Of course this approach can be the one a company starts with depending on their incentives. That's what Google did with Android, they didn't start with a monopoly and won't have one in the mobile market but their entire purpose in making an OS is to lead people into depending on their services. Android's entire life purpose is for you to have Maps, Gmail, Drive and Chrome preinstalled.
- smolder 3y ago
  Security work for an otherwise solved problem is finite. It's only infinite if they make it that way by continuing to pile on new (likely unwanted) features. Otherwise the frequency of needing patches will trend towards 0 and eventually there will be none.
gregd 3y ago
Did I love Windows XP? Yes. But to me, it always looked like it was designed by Fisher Price.
- jimbob45 3y ago
  On the other hand, Windows 98 looked like it was designed by 1955 IBM. It may have been an overcorrection but it was certainly a welcome one.
- pjerem 3y ago
  Maybe I was too young but honestly I didn’t care at all. Was it colorful and super contrasted ? Yes. But it was not, at least to me, ugly. Sure, coming from gray OSes from the 90’s, it could have appeared as "childish" but I really think this was just because people somehow internalized that "pro = sad gray". And for what its worth, I’m still convinced that we never had something better than the slightly 3D beige controls of Windows XP. Now, any app is more colored than Windows XP but nothing is coherent anymore, there is no more "OS look" anywhere, it’s just the applications, their colors and their branding. Even Apple is losing this battle update after update. I think it (metaphorically) says something about how we lost control of our computers.
- magicalhippo 3y ago
  It introduced theme support through, so first thing I always did was to switch to the Windows 2000 theme.
- timbit42 3y ago
  I always turned it off so it looked more like Windows 2000.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
flohofwoe 3y ago
Still not a fan of the Windows XP bubble-gum theme and overcrowded start menu, but definitely a move in the right direction (back towards the peak Windows version Win2k).
- cardanome 3y ago
  Agreed. First thing I always did was enable classic theme.
swells34 3y ago
Ya know, I've never had a Linux box that had any of the problems listed about modern windows. Also all the advantages listed about Windows XP are also present in Linux... But I've never paid Microsoft for an OS that showed me ads against my will in my Start Menu, so maybe I just don't know what I'm missing.
- plandis 3y ago
  Good quality Nvidia drivers and support for games, mostly.
  - vorticalbox 3y ago
    I've been running Linux on my work laptop for 6 years now and Nvidia drives are pretty good.
    - eddythompson80 3y ago
      Assuming you don’t use Wayland of course.
      - vorticalbox 3y ago
        Not currently I have enabled it and quickly went back as the DE would crash (running gnome on pop!_os)
      - sudohackthenews 3y ago
        I’m on Fedora 39 and nvidia drivers work great on Wayland (gnome)
        Filligree 3y ago
        Unless you run Discord, or any Steam game that doesn’t run at you monitor update frequency.
        eddythompson80 3y ago
ajdude 3y ago
Whenever I set up a new computer for older family members, despite it being windows 11, I always install open shell[1] and retro bar[2]. Between the two, I've made the operating system look very close to Windows XP visually, and they always appreciate it. [1] https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu [2] https://github.com/dremin/RetroBar https://github.com/dremin/RetroBar
- matthewfcarlson 3y ago
  My grandpa in particular is very technologically savvy but his real expertise stops around 1999. He uses windows 11 but detests it and frequently encounters issues that no one else on the internet have. One time while visiting, I set up windows 3.1 in a virtual box VM and he lit up like a candle. He was very excited about getting his old pascal programs running again.
  - exikyut 3y ago
    You're probably already aware there are some hilarious drivers for I think VirtualBox that let ~Win3.1 achieve practically infinite VGA resolution. And then you have your choice of networking via eg SLIP or (more sanely lol) a program that can mount VHDs offline.
- belltaco 3y ago
  I hate it when visual oriented products make it difficult or impossible to see a screenshot of how they look like. Both of those products' github pages don't have screenshot, the first does have a website but no screenshots or links to them there either. Do you have to install a tool that modifies the internals of your OS in order to see how it could look like? Imagine if you had to set up a painting on your wall before you could even see what it's a painting of.
  - ajdude 3y ago
    Open shell could definitely benefit from some screenshots. For retrobar, at least, there is a screenshot on the first line of the readme (it really does just look like the windows XP, windows 98, etc. taskbar nothing special going on).
nicetryguy 3y ago
> There is no Cortana, no AI Co-Pilot, or an extreme amount of unwanted, pre-installed software. Ok XP came with tons of crap and bloatware from most manufacturers of the time, let's not rewrite history here! Of course, you could just do a fresh install or actually delete the programs you didn't want, looking at you Edge....
- darknavi 3y ago
  Oh I love McAfee preinstalled for me! /s
- calamari4065 3y ago
  Let's not rewrite history here, OEMs shipped a ton of preinstalled bloatware. If you got an image of XP from Microsoft, it was totally clean. Contrary to today when Microsoft bundles bloatware directly with the OS itself. You can't install a clean copy because a clean copy just doesn't exist.
- moolcool 3y ago
  The key phrase is is "from manufacturers". Most power users and DIYers have always done fresh installs.
- accrual 3y ago
  And for those wanting even less bloat, to the point of removing drivers and other unwanted OS components, there is nLite. :) https://www.nliteos.com/nlite.html https://www.nliteos.com/nlite.html
- Sakos 3y ago
  Now we get Microsoft delivered bloat and unwanted, pre-installed software. They'll even automatically install all the OEM junk when updating a fresh W10/11 install with a clean USB stick made from the MS iso. That didn't happen with a fresh XP install with a non-OEM disc.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Topfi 3y ago
I'd settle for one well-thought-out UI concept, built from the ground up, targeting specific device categories, and running on a modern, legacy-free foundation. That would not be suitable for every user or use case and shouldn't replace a more legacy-oriented Windows, in my opinion, but it'd serve a large contingent of users and OEMs designing target devices better than what feels like a hodgepodge of hardware support and UI philosophies, accumulated over multiple decades. Unfortunately, while modern-day MSFT does extremely well financially[0] with their current strategy, their ability to execute such a major OS project from the ground-up and stick with it to the finish line is doubtful given historical examples[1]. Given that they are doing so well financially, it's fair if they feel that such investments aren't worth their efforts, though I view it as potentially shortsighted, considering the value of continued ownership of a large percentage of the platform market. Even if they become a transformer-model-focused company on top of being business over end-user focused, having future business users familiar with your system and retaining some control over the software that your transformer-model implementations run on is sensible. If one wants what is described in the article and shown in the attached video, there are solutions out there to get very close to that UI. Combine that with LTSC and I feel that would scratch that particular itch quite well. [0] https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/microsoft-is-getting-close-to-overtaking-apple-as-the-most-valuable-us-company https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/microsoft-is-gettin... [1] https://www.windowscentral.com/surface-duo-andromeda-windows-core-os https://www.windowscentral.com/surface-duo-andromeda-windows...
k8sToGo 3y ago
I watched the video but for me still too many slow UI animations.
- TonyTrapp 3y ago
  Indeed. It's a video, they could have shown everything exactly as they like. Yet the decided that it should take a full two seconds from clicking the taskbar icon until Explorer is usable. Are people gaslit into thinking that this is okay or normal that they design their dream software like this? Explorer should (and does) open in an instant on a real system, no loading animations required.
transcriptase 3y ago
Microsoft actually makes the version of Windows that people want, but it’s called LTSC and they really don’t want you to have it. No bloat, no ads, no forced or feature updates, optional security patches only, virtually nothing installed by default, and minimal telemetry.
- siva7 3y ago
  Sounds like Windows 2000.
- tiffanyh 3y ago
  This, plus - there use to be a program Microsoft had for PC manufacturers that certified the manufacturer (like Dell) hadn't install bloat on it either before selling it to you. I can't recall the name of that Windows version, but it was hugely appealing for the technical minded while it lasted - because it was basically like getting LTSC from Dell/HP/Lenovo (without you having to do the install yourself).
  - nolongerthere 3y ago
    Signature edition
- jessriedel 3y ago
  It's only $110. How do they discourage people from using it?
  - DANmode 3y ago
    Link to where you can secure one of these licenses?
  - malfist 3y ago
    Business only with a minimum of 5 licenses
    - DANmode 3y ago
haunter 3y ago
Windows 10 LTSC if you want something modern. Everything is removed, no preinstalled apps. Just the OS.
frabjoused 3y ago
Nostalgia aside, this isn’t actually better. The animations alone would be enough to drop most users after an hour.
- brink 3y ago
  So turn them off
  - Feathercrown 3y ago
    Why do that when there are ready to go OS options that require no config?
- flashback2199 3y ago
  This, and too much padding/margin
  - 0cf8612b2e1e 3y ago
    Those were egregiously huge. Part of my rose tinted glasses about past UI systems was the information density. Now everything fetishes “clean” interfaces with minimal controls.
- neilalexander 3y ago
  I wish UI designers understood this simple rule: only animate/add a transition if I would have been waiting for a different reason anyway. If there's a genuine delay before you can complete showing me something, then sure, animate away. If you can render what I want to see instantly, don't make me suffer through an animation for it.
  - accrual 3y ago
    Funny related observation - 3DMark2000 displays a little transition/animation during setup before it begins copying files. On a modern SSD, the animation takes longer to complete than the actual installation. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples in modern software.
matthewfcarlson 3y ago
I personally love the blended style and I think the goals of what this going for is awesome. Let’s bloat, more focus on core computing features. But I suspect if I were to run XP, I would miss some of those bloat style features. Automatic updates for apps in the background, cloud file providers, better window management tools, etc. I’m not longer at Microsoft and I am still a bit worried about the future of windows. I was hoping panos would be able to drive things in a more elegant and streamlined direction (to his credit, it does look better imho and many of the rougher visual edges have been filed off in 11, though some still do exist). But he has left the company and Yusuf is taking over. Obvious standard opinion is my own boilerplate.
doodpants 3y ago
Neat effort, but my one complaint is how much whitespace there is between and around various UI elements, especially in item lists such as in the Start menu and the sidebar of various configuration dialogs. Actual Windows XP hails from an era before visual designers all collectively decided that high information density was bad aesthetics.
pxc 3y ago
What makes Windows XP good relative to modern Windows is what it doesn't have (or doesn't have in comparable amounts): telemetry, advertising, multiple generations of differing UIs with their own styles, a huge installation footprint, online accounts and cloud services tie-ins, dark patterns to trick people into agreeing to the former, tons of bloatware, etc. A Windows which is a descendant of Windows 8 but is themed like Windows XP is basically worthless and misses the point. It just fetishizes an aesthetic that is in fact only incidentally associated with a less user-hostile era.
asylteltine 3y ago
I can’t wait for proton to become even more mainstream. We need to put pressure on AAA titles to support Linux. Many anti cheats already do but it’s the games themselves that refuse to allow Linux. The faster I can dump windows the better because the only windows install I have is for a dedicated gaming machine.
ary 3y ago
The "Fisher-Price'ing" [1] of the user interface isn't necessarily better in my view. It took the already big and colorful user interface elements and essentially made them bigger. When the video finally gets past the installer there isn't much that wasn't already a part of XP beyond the added, slow UI animations (which is definitely not an improvement, just look at most UI research and anecdotal griping on the web for the last 15 years). Yearning for XP is something I can relate to. It feels like the last good UI version of Windows. The video is only a nostalgia trip though. Actual improvements on XP's UI would be: - Removing the hierarchy and modes Microsoft kept piling on since 3.1. These are endemic in the shell. Both the Start menu and Windows Explorer are rife with them. - Organizing the Control Panel such that it's thematically grouped. All settings involving the display (and thus graphics sub-system) are in a single place, all networking is controlled in one place, etc. - Reducing the number and complexity of mouse interactions. Context menus should only be needed for the most exceptional cases. Right clicking to accomplish a task should be rare. - Near elimination of dialogs. Users mostly dismiss them without reading anyway. - Reduce, to the degree possible, the need to understand the file system, and its hierarchy, to find one's data and make basic use of the system. Watching people try to understand files and the file system hierarchy is pretty painful. - Reduce the need to manage individual windows, and introduce a way to intelligently place windows across programs such that the user can juxtapose the applications they need to copy/paste between to get work done with minimal effort. These are just what's top of mind, and I don't fault the creator of the video for making a tribute to XP. I'll add that a lot of these complaints apply to macOS, but often to a lesser degree. Perhaps I'm the old man yelling at the cloud here [2], but this stuff has been eating away at me for years and there doesn't seem to exist the will to address any of it. [1] https://shop.mattel.com/pages/fisher-price https://shop.mattel.com/pages/fisher-price [2] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/old-man-yells-at-cloud https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/old-man-yells-at-cloud
- torstenvl 3y ago
  All of your UI suggestions are bad UI and shockingly similar to all the BS Windows 10-11 force-feed us. Hierarchy (organization) is better than search. We all know this because whenever hierarchy is replaced with search, search had to reimplement hierarchy to be usable! E.g., grouping and nesting of pinned Win10+ start menu items. Control Panel did have groups in Win XP. They suck. I always disable it. Windows 10 removed a ton of context menus. Windows 11 removed more. They both suck. Stop hiding things from me.
_fat_santa 3y ago
IMO I think with the changing dynamics of how people use their computers (most things now are web based whereas before it was always an app you installed on your computer) coupled with the maturity of the Linux desktop, most regular people could probably get away with using Linux these days. Still the biggest barrier to Linux adoption is just getting it setup on your machine.
- CatWChainsaw 3y ago
  Yes. I speak as a layperson who wants to. The landmine of UEFI/BIOS, TPM, partitions, etc, and knowing I absolutely cannot fuck anything up. Those are huge hurdles for someone whose job is outside of computing and just needs a few things to just work.
DeepYogurt 3y ago
Looks a lot like KDE to me
joombaga 3y ago
When they opened the Control Panel and didn't immediately Switch to Classic View, I had a surprisingly visceral reaction.
nolongerthere 3y ago
The blends the UI aesthetic of XP with the worst UX of W11, why would anyone want this?
sojono 3y ago
I'm using Win10 Pro, and I have no ads, no problems with unwanted apps, a sane start menu, and I run almost all non-ms software on top so microsoft's incompetence there is a nonissue. I can also replicate this on win11 but I don't see a reason to upgrade. The way there is fairly simple, actually: OOSU Shutup10: this removes pretty much all the annoyances. https://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10 https://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10 Classicshell: Microsoft is never going to make a start menu that doesn't suck again, but others will. http://www.classicshell.net/ http://www.classicshell.net/ Everything search: classicshell comes with a pretty decent windows search replacement, but you should use this instead. It is so, so fast. https://www.voidtools.com/ https://www.voidtools.com/
pjmlp 3y ago
Except this would mean being stuck on classic Win32 with MFC, and not so goodie .NET Framework 2.0. Unless Windows XP 2024 would also be expect to be similar to macOS and Android, with .NET taking the same role as Swift and Java/Kotlin on those platforms. Hint, this is still far from it on Windows 11, despite the WinRT, WinUI and WinAppSDK adventures.
johnea 3y ago
Just another example of M$ brain damage. What a depressingly limited idea of "everything I want from a new OS": all I want is to be an exploited corporate capture victim...
phmqk76 3y ago
I really like this concept. I see a lot of negativity in the comments over the “Fisher Price” UI, but honestly, this seems much more familiar and easier to navigate than what Windows has become to the average user. This is something that I can see my parents or less technically-inclined siblings or friends breathing a sigh of relief to use. Simple, colorful, easy workflows. It’s why the iPad has a cult following among the 60 and over crowd.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  I don’t recall XP actually being all that easy to use. It had bright colors, but the menus could get a bit maze-like. IMO XP was familiar more than it was simple to use. iOS is legitimately easy to use.
exabrial 3y ago
I don't understand why people like XP so much. Windows 2000 was the ultimate OS: lean, fast, focused, and absolutely zero crapware installed. No stupid internet accounts needed to run your local OS and it did what it was supposed to do.
- tonyedgecombe 3y ago
  2000 was also the last version that didn't require activation.
- dagmx 3y ago
  XP was likely the first memorable intro to windows for many developers in the home context. It was designed to be appealing to look at and a fresh coat of paint. By comparison, you’d be hard pressed to find a non-enthusiast who really remembers the differences between 95/98/ME/2000 because they largely looked similar. Unlike 2000, it was also aimed at home use. The prior home use system was ME which was also not very well received at the time. XP unified the business and home segments. Add to that, the immense PR failure that was Vista, and a very long life for XP, it’s not surprising that it has the most fondness in people’s psyche.
  - mrweasel 3y ago
    > 95/98/ME/2000 because they largely looked similar. That was a feature, for me it was 95, 98, NT4, Windows 2000 then it all started falling apart and Linux and MacOSX because the more attractive alternatives. For those who don't remember, we used to call the Windows XP UI the "Fisher Price" UI. It was the first dumbed down Windows UI. I'd agree, the nostalgia for Windows XP is misplaced, when the version before that was the more attractive option. Overall the quality of Windows 2000 just felt like it was way above Windows XP. All the Windows UI inconsistencies started showing up in Windows XP. In the "Windows XP 2024" video I think it's interesting that that the two worst features, the Windows XP UI and the online account activation, have both been preserved.
    - dagmx 3y ago
      Windows 2000 wasn’t the version before Windows XP for most people though. It was Windows ME. Most people would not have experienced 2000. Windows 2000 was the last of the separate business targeted operating systems. Therefore I’d argue the nostalgia isn’t misplaced because most people under 45 just couldn’t have the nostalgia for 2000 to begin with. XP unified the two lines into one OS with multiple SKUs instead of completely different kernels.
51Cards 3y ago
This but on Windows 7 please. It is still my favourite version of Windows.
jolmg 3y ago
3:27 I wasn't expecting this to include a mandatory registration and sign-in to an online account. I thought the inability to have offline/local accounts was one of the hated points of the new Windows OSes.
- novok 3y ago
  I see you missed the big skip button in the bottom right
hereme888 3y ago
Windows from an alternate universe where companies care mainly about the user's benefit. I think Linux would barely be a thing at all if Microsoft had focused on clean and performant experiences that allowed users more control, flexibility, and privacy. Instead, they put themselves through the pain and expense of pretending to care for OSS. They would have loyal customers due to the trust from a clean Windows experience. Now Linux is nearer to an actual replacement for Windows.
- realfeel78 3y ago
  > I think Linux would barely be a thing at all if… So, like it still is now.
kleiba 3y ago
Gosh, do I hate the constant animations. I guess I'm one of the last 10 people on Earth who hate phones and this version of Windows definitely looks like it took a lot of inspiration from smart phone OS's.
StillBored 3y ago
The theming/window manager/basic UI groups at MS seem like they are either incompetent or just Aholes. Largely because they seem to remove features during rewrites and then discover they need them back, a few years later. Ex: windows 3.x could do "dark mode", as well as any number of other things that got ripped out. Yes, having a theming manager as complete as the one in say KDE that can create themes to match most current and historic OSs is "hard" but looking at the code doesn't seem like something professionals paid to maintain the largest desktop OS by market share should be incapable of it. So, it seems to me that no one should have been allowed to ship a windows theme/WM that couldn't at least support a win95 style theme. AKA you don't get to merge it until it can do these half dozen simple things. Similarly the task bar, ok nice you created a new one, but can it be positioned on the left side of the screen, or have the start menu moved? Then no, it doesn't get merged.
zlib 3y ago
Setup was nice and slick but once booted I didn't like it. Too much padding on everything, too clunky.
bambax 3y ago
> ... and when the Windows search function was a useful feature I have used Windows since 3.0 (before 3.1) and have never seen a useful search function in any version of Windows. Where was it all this time?
- morsch 3y ago
  Windows 9x had a decent file search function. It was slow, but reliable. It even included full text search, though I'm not sure how well that worked, I don't think I ever had the patience to use it. I wish modern Gnome had something just like it. I usually use the shell, instead. Here's an overly nitpicky but very in-depth description: http://hallofshame.gp.co.at/find95.htm http://hallofshame.gp.co.at/find95.htm
FooBarWidget 3y ago
I'm old enough to remember when people were skeptical of Windows XP. High resource usage, compatibility problems and the childish look & feel were among the criticisms. There were calls to not upgrade, and to stick to Windows 98. How it despite all that criticism it has become a cult classic is beyond me.
carlosjobim 3y ago
Since this just about GUI appearance, I'd like to mention one of the most beautiful and practical GUI themes for Windows 7, and in my opinion one of the best kept secrets for more than a decade, Shine 2.0: https://www.deviantart.com/zainadeel/art/Shine-2-0-for-Windows-7-172671190 https://www.deviantart.com/zainadeel/art/Shine-2-0-for-Windo... It's been many years since I used anything Windows, but it was always one of the first things I configured with any new install. Looking at the screenshots now, it hasn't aged a bit since it was published in 2010. And the other concepts and themes that guy published around the same time still look fresh. Imagine if Microsoft had discovered him and put him in charge of style!
ChoGGi 3y ago
It might have been gaudy compared to 2000, but I much prefer the colorful XP design to the gray on gray material "design" that's popular nowadays. Only sex perverts don't like clearly defined (button) boundaries... Though my safe word is Fisher Price. /s
apapapa 3y ago
Windows 2000 was windows XP without all the candy interface... Best version ever.
LeFantome 3y ago
Does Windows XP 2024 run 64 bit applications?
unethical_ban 3y ago
I bought a piece of software called StartIsBack that makes windows 11 feel a lot closer to windows 7 with some features and look and feel. $5!
bulldog48 3y ago
[flagged]
bulldog48 3y ago
[flagged]
ksec 3y ago
I think the keypoint here isn't the graphics design, or animations etc as many commented. It is its simplicity. All Modern software tried to introduce more features, and more ways to access the same features or functions. I am not sure if such thing exists or anyone have any pointers. Consider 90% of my time on computer are spend within the browser. I wonder what would it be like if the OS had nothing. Just a Desktop and Browser. No Settings, or even File Explorer. If there is a file it lives on Desktop. The only remaining 10% I think would be a video player. I wonder what would the experience be like. Would I be missing anything.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  You could install a Linux distro that doesn’t bring a ton along with it (arch will do), install a window manager (not a desktop environment), and go from there.
6R1M0R4CL3 3y ago
Well the only place I use Windows is at work. I went the Linux way and I will kill myself if I had to get back to Windows.
- InCityDreams 3y ago
  You must really dread going to work.
dusted 3y ago
Things I don't like from this demo: Setup screen: * Flat box instead of real dialog in the installer * No box around the close button * No accents on the next button * Next button provides no feedback to mouse-over or mouse-click * List items (the C: partition) has no borders before it's moused-over, it's basically a point-and-click adventure entity where you have to mouse-over everything to see what can be interacted with Boot screen: * Flat logo is ugly, should have some accents, original XP logo much better * busy-bar is weird, it's segmented but the segments do not animate, rather the entire 3 segments slide around.. again, original is much better. Finishing installation: * Different type of "window" or container now, still rounded border, missing accents. Inconsistent. * Items in list again not indicative of being clickable. * Text-inputs give no feedback on mouse-over or of being selected * Next button still not giving any feedback Third installation screen: Stop already. It was annoying in XP too. Booted: * UI looks like a bad Macromedia flash parody version of XP. * And that settings stuff? Oh god why! Bring back the control panel and the dialogues of XP, those were again MUCH nicer. Okay, this is worse than the orignal in every single way.. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. - Hanlon's razor, but still, it's really hard to believe someone would honestly see these as improvements. Hope for humanity: lost. What would actually be nice is Windows XP UI, exactly how it was before SP1, but without the bugs and crashes (I _KNOW_ that can be done without messing with the UI) with the ability to run current software on current hardware, with nothing at all changed in the UI.
addicted 3y ago
This is misleading. The demo looks great because of the animated transitions and the large text. But that would be a pain to use as opposed to viewing in a demo. I remember when I used XP I switched to the classic start menu because that worked great. There are still useful things to learn from XP. Depth doesn’t hurt UI/UX. Flatness isn’t the last word in design. Single (or at most dual) lists are better than massive grids of options. We don’t need all the pop ups and promotions. The OS should respond to the user. It shouldn’t keep prompting them.
wkat4242 3y ago
It makes you sign in to a Microsoft account lol, how is that better than windows 11?

233 points by accrual 3y ago

I don't know, this feels like the worst parts of Windows XP (Fisher Price UI), with an annoying setup workflow, and a Microsoft account tie in... not exactly what I'd like to have today

Levitz 3y ago
I'll take the consistency of a "Fisher Price UI" over the absolute current horror any day.
- accrual 3y ago
  Especially since the classic theme was still available. XP with the classic theme wasn't too dissimilar from the proceeding Windows 2000. Much more professional UI.

steve1977 3y ago

Actually, just Windows XP. Or Windows 7. With security updates, but no GUI “improvements”. With PowerShell though.

tims33 3y ago

It feels even clunkier now in this video than it did when it came out.

dewey 3y ago
That video somehow mashes together Windows Vista and XP design elements which makes it look a bit odd.

sircastor 3y ago

One of the biggest challenges modern OS developers face (Apple and Microsoft namely) is how to make the new version of the OS appealing enough for users to move to. There are carrots like a fancy new feature, or sticks like “we’re not supporting this anymore, so if you want your computer to be secure you need to upgrade.” A lot of people don’t care about the carrots though. Their computer does everything they need it to and does so reliably. In a lot of ways the OS is a solved problem, but the companies who make them still need to pay the bills for all the security work that will always need to be done. It makes me wonder if Apple (for example) put macOS into a no-new-features mode and just improved security from here-on-out what the long term effects would be for users and the industry.

noqc 3y ago
>need to pay the bills for all the security work that will always need to be done This is in no way the business incentive of a major OS, and you've painted an extraordiarily rosy picture of OS development.
- Lazonedo 3y ago
  Yes. Microsoft has already reached the user peak of their market, there cannot be anymore growth just from the OS alone, so the point of the OS isn't to be a good OS anymore, but to be a platform to sell you other things: AI (copilot integration), cloud services (onedrive integration, xbox game pass etc), advertisement (bundled crapware like candy crush that Windows 10 used to automatically install) and so on. Of course this approach can be the one a company starts with depending on their incentives. That's what Google did with Android, they didn't start with a monopoly and won't have one in the mobile market but their entire purpose in making an OS is to lead people into depending on their services. Android's entire life purpose is for you to have Maps, Gmail, Drive and Chrome preinstalled.
smolder 3y ago
Security work for an otherwise solved problem is finite. It's only infinite if they make it that way by continuing to pile on new (likely unwanted) features. Otherwise the frequency of needing patches will trend towards 0 and eventually there will be none.

gregd 3y ago

Did I love Windows XP? Yes. But to me, it always looked like it was designed by Fisher Price.

jimbob45 3y ago
On the other hand, Windows 98 looked like it was designed by 1955 IBM. It may have been an overcorrection but it was certainly a welcome one.
pjerem 3y ago
Maybe I was too young but honestly I didn’t care at all. Was it colorful and super contrasted ? Yes. But it was not, at least to me, ugly. Sure, coming from gray OSes from the 90’s, it could have appeared as "childish" but I really think this was just because people somehow internalized that "pro = sad gray". And for what its worth, I’m still convinced that we never had something better than the slightly 3D beige controls of Windows XP. Now, any app is more colored than Windows XP but nothing is coherent anymore, there is no more "OS look" anywhere, it’s just the applications, their colors and their branding. Even Apple is losing this battle update after update. I think it (metaphorically) says something about how we lost control of our computers.
magicalhippo 3y ago
It introduced theme support through, so first thing I always did was to switch to the Windows 2000 theme.
timbit42 3y ago
I always turned it off so it looked more like Windows 2000.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

flohofwoe 3y ago

Still not a fan of the Windows XP bubble-gum theme and overcrowded start menu, but definitely a move in the right direction (back towards the peak Windows version Win2k).

cardanome 3y ago
Agreed. First thing I always did was enable classic theme.

swells34 3y ago

Ya know, I've never had a Linux box that had any of the problems listed about modern windows. Also all the advantages listed about Windows XP are also present in Linux... But I've never paid Microsoft for an OS that showed me ads against my will in my Start Menu, so maybe I just don't know what I'm missing.

plandis 3y ago
Good quality Nvidia drivers and support for games, mostly.
- vorticalbox 3y ago
  I've been running Linux on my work laptop for 6 years now and Nvidia drives are pretty good.
  - eddythompson80 3y ago
    Assuming you don’t use Wayland of course.
    - vorticalbox 3y ago
      Not currently I have enabled it and quickly went back as the DE would crash (running gnome on pop!_os)
    - sudohackthenews 3y ago
      I’m on Fedora 39 and nvidia drivers work great on Wayland (gnome)
      - Filligree 3y ago
        Unless you run Discord, or any Steam game that doesn’t run at you monitor update frequency.
      - eddythompson80 3y ago

ajdude 3y ago

Whenever I set up a new computer for older family members, despite it being windows 11, I always install open shell[1] and retro bar[2]. Between the two, I've made the operating system look very close to Windows XP visually, and they always appreciate it. [1] https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu https://github.com/Open-Shell/Open-Shell-Menu [2] https://github.com/dremin/RetroBar https://github.com/dremin/RetroBar

matthewfcarlson 3y ago
My grandpa in particular is very technologically savvy but his real expertise stops around 1999. He uses windows 11 but detests it and frequently encounters issues that no one else on the internet have. One time while visiting, I set up windows 3.1 in a virtual box VM and he lit up like a candle. He was very excited about getting his old pascal programs running again.
- exikyut 3y ago
  You're probably already aware there are some hilarious drivers for I think VirtualBox that let ~Win3.1 achieve practically infinite VGA resolution. And then you have your choice of networking via eg SLIP or (more sanely lol) a program that can mount VHDs offline.
belltaco 3y ago
I hate it when visual oriented products make it difficult or impossible to see a screenshot of how they look like. Both of those products' github pages don't have screenshot, the first does have a website but no screenshots or links to them there either. Do you have to install a tool that modifies the internals of your OS in order to see how it could look like? Imagine if you had to set up a painting on your wall before you could even see what it's a painting of.
- ajdude 3y ago
  Open shell could definitely benefit from some screenshots. For retrobar, at least, there is a screenshot on the first line of the readme (it really does just look like the windows XP, windows 98, etc. taskbar nothing special going on).

nicetryguy 3y ago

> There is no Cortana, no AI Co-Pilot, or an extreme amount of unwanted, pre-installed software. Ok XP came with tons of crap and bloatware from most manufacturers of the time, let's not rewrite history here! Of course, you could just do a fresh install or actually delete the programs you didn't want, looking at you Edge....

darknavi 3y ago
Oh I love McAfee preinstalled for me! /s
calamari4065 3y ago
Let's not rewrite history here, OEMs shipped a ton of preinstalled bloatware. If you got an image of XP from Microsoft, it was totally clean. Contrary to today when Microsoft bundles bloatware directly with the OS itself. You can't install a clean copy because a clean copy just doesn't exist.
moolcool 3y ago
The key phrase is is "from manufacturers". Most power users and DIYers have always done fresh installs.
accrual 3y ago
And for those wanting even less bloat, to the point of removing drivers and other unwanted OS components, there is nLite. :) https://www.nliteos.com/nlite.html https://www.nliteos.com/nlite.html
Sakos 3y ago
Now we get Microsoft delivered bloat and unwanted, pre-installed software. They'll even automatically install all the OEM junk when updating a fresh W10/11 install with a clean USB stick made from the MS iso. That didn't happen with a fresh XP install with a non-OEM disc.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Topfi 3y ago

I'd settle for one well-thought-out UI concept, built from the ground up, targeting specific device categories, and running on a modern, legacy-free foundation. That would not be suitable for every user or use case and shouldn't replace a more legacy-oriented Windows, in my opinion, but it'd serve a large contingent of users and OEMs designing target devices better than what feels like a hodgepodge of hardware support and UI philosophies, accumulated over multiple decades. Unfortunately, while modern-day MSFT does extremely well financially[0] with their current strategy, their ability to execute such a major OS project from the ground-up and stick with it to the finish line is doubtful given historical examples[1]. Given that they are doing so well financially, it's fair if they feel that such investments aren't worth their efforts, though I view it as potentially shortsighted, considering the value of continued ownership of a large percentage of the platform market. Even if they become a transformer-model-focused company on top of being business over end-user focused, having future business users familiar with your system and retaining some control over the software that your transformer-model implementations run on is sensible. If one wants what is described in the article and shown in the attached video, there are solutions out there to get very close to that UI. Combine that with LTSC and I feel that would scratch that particular itch quite well. [0] https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/microsoft-is-getting-close-to-overtaking-apple-as-the-most-valuable-us-company https://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft/microsoft-is-gettin... [1] https://www.windowscentral.com/surface-duo-andromeda-windows-core-os https://www.windowscentral.com/surface-duo-andromeda-windows...

k8sToGo 3y ago

I watched the video but for me still too many slow UI animations.

TonyTrapp 3y ago
Indeed. It's a video, they could have shown everything exactly as they like. Yet the decided that it should take a full two seconds from clicking the taskbar icon until Explorer is usable. Are people gaslit into thinking that this is okay or normal that they design their dream software like this? Explorer should (and does) open in an instant on a real system, no loading animations required.

transcriptase 3y ago

Microsoft actually makes the version of Windows that people want, but it’s called LTSC and they really don’t want you to have it. No bloat, no ads, no forced or feature updates, optional security patches only, virtually nothing installed by default, and minimal telemetry.

siva7 3y ago
Sounds like Windows 2000.
tiffanyh 3y ago
This, plus - there use to be a program Microsoft had for PC manufacturers that certified the manufacturer (like Dell) hadn't install bloat on it either before selling it to you. I can't recall the name of that Windows version, but it was hugely appealing for the technical minded while it lasted - because it was basically like getting LTSC from Dell/HP/Lenovo (without you having to do the install yourself).
- nolongerthere 3y ago
  Signature edition
jessriedel 3y ago
It's only $110. How do they discourage people from using it?
- DANmode 3y ago
  Link to where you can secure one of these licenses?
- malfist 3y ago
  Business only with a minimum of 5 licenses
  - DANmode 3y ago

haunter 3y ago

Windows 10 LTSC if you want something modern. Everything is removed, no preinstalled apps. Just the OS.

frabjoused 3y ago

Nostalgia aside, this isn’t actually better. The animations alone would be enough to drop most users after an hour.

brink 3y ago
So turn them off
- Feathercrown 3y ago
  Why do that when there are ready to go OS options that require no config?
flashback2199 3y ago
This, and too much padding/margin
- 0cf8612b2e1e 3y ago
  Those were egregiously huge. Part of my rose tinted glasses about past UI systems was the information density. Now everything fetishes “clean” interfaces with minimal controls.
neilalexander 3y ago
I wish UI designers understood this simple rule: only animate/add a transition if I would have been waiting for a different reason anyway. If there's a genuine delay before you can complete showing me something, then sure, animate away. If you can render what I want to see instantly, don't make me suffer through an animation for it.
- accrual 3y ago
  Funny related observation - 3DMark2000 displays a little transition/animation during setup before it begins copying files. On a modern SSD, the animation takes longer to complete than the actual installation. I'm sure there are plenty of other examples in modern software.

matthewfcarlson 3y ago

I personally love the blended style and I think the goals of what this going for is awesome. Let’s bloat, more focus on core computing features. But I suspect if I were to run XP, I would miss some of those bloat style features. Automatic updates for apps in the background, cloud file providers, better window management tools, etc. I’m not longer at Microsoft and I am still a bit worried about the future of windows. I was hoping panos would be able to drive things in a more elegant and streamlined direction (to his credit, it does look better imho and many of the rougher visual edges have been filed off in 11, though some still do exist). But he has left the company and Yusuf is taking over. Obvious standard opinion is my own boilerplate.

doodpants 3y ago

Neat effort, but my one complaint is how much whitespace there is between and around various UI elements, especially in item lists such as in the Start menu and the sidebar of various configuration dialogs. Actual Windows XP hails from an era before visual designers all collectively decided that high information density was bad aesthetics.

pxc 3y ago

What makes Windows XP good relative to modern Windows is what it doesn't have (or doesn't have in comparable amounts): telemetry, advertising, multiple generations of differing UIs with their own styles, a huge installation footprint, online accounts and cloud services tie-ins, dark patterns to trick people into agreeing to the former, tons of bloatware, etc. A Windows which is a descendant of Windows 8 but is themed like Windows XP is basically worthless and misses the point. It just fetishizes an aesthetic that is in fact only incidentally associated with a less user-hostile era.

asylteltine 3y ago

I can’t wait for proton to become even more mainstream. We need to put pressure on AAA titles to support Linux. Many anti cheats already do but it’s the games themselves that refuse to allow Linux. The faster I can dump windows the better because the only windows install I have is for a dedicated gaming machine.

ary 3y ago

The "Fisher-Price'ing" [1] of the user interface isn't necessarily better in my view. It took the already big and colorful user interface elements and essentially made them bigger. When the video finally gets past the installer there isn't much that wasn't already a part of XP beyond the added, slow UI animations (which is definitely not an improvement, just look at most UI research and anecdotal griping on the web for the last 15 years). Yearning for XP is something I can relate to. It feels like the last good UI version of Windows. The video is only a nostalgia trip though. Actual improvements on XP's UI would be: - Removing the hierarchy and modes Microsoft kept piling on since 3.1. These are endemic in the shell. Both the Start menu and Windows Explorer are rife with them. - Organizing the Control Panel such that it's thematically grouped. All settings involving the display (and thus graphics sub-system) are in a single place, all networking is controlled in one place, etc. - Reducing the number and complexity of mouse interactions. Context menus should only be needed for the most exceptional cases. Right clicking to accomplish a task should be rare. - Near elimination of dialogs. Users mostly dismiss them without reading anyway. - Reduce, to the degree possible, the need to understand the file system, and its hierarchy, to find one's data and make basic use of the system. Watching people try to understand files and the file system hierarchy is pretty painful. - Reduce the need to manage individual windows, and introduce a way to intelligently place windows across programs such that the user can juxtapose the applications they need to copy/paste between to get work done with minimal effort. These are just what's top of mind, and I don't fault the creator of the video for making a tribute to XP. I'll add that a lot of these complaints apply to macOS, but often to a lesser degree. Perhaps I'm the old man yelling at the cloud here [2], but this stuff has been eating away at me for years and there doesn't seem to exist the will to address any of it. [1] https://shop.mattel.com/pages/fisher-price https://shop.mattel.com/pages/fisher-price [2] https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/old-man-yells-at-cloud https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/old-man-yells-at-cloud

torstenvl 3y ago
All of your UI suggestions are bad UI and shockingly similar to all the BS Windows 10-11 force-feed us. Hierarchy (organization) is better than search. We all know this because whenever hierarchy is replaced with search, search had to reimplement hierarchy to be usable! E.g., grouping and nesting of pinned Win10+ start menu items. Control Panel did have groups in Win XP. They suck. I always disable it. Windows 10 removed a ton of context menus. Windows 11 removed more. They both suck. Stop hiding things from me.

_fat_santa 3y ago

IMO I think with the changing dynamics of how people use their computers (most things now are web based whereas before it was always an app you installed on your computer) coupled with the maturity of the Linux desktop, most regular people could probably get away with using Linux these days. Still the biggest barrier to Linux adoption is just getting it setup on your machine.

CatWChainsaw 3y ago
Yes. I speak as a layperson who wants to. The landmine of UEFI/BIOS, TPM, partitions, etc, and knowing I absolutely cannot fuck anything up. Those are huge hurdles for someone whose job is outside of computing and just needs a few things to just work.

DeepYogurt 3y ago

Looks a lot like KDE to me

joombaga 3y ago

When they opened the Control Panel and didn't immediately Switch to Classic View, I had a surprisingly visceral reaction.

nolongerthere 3y ago

The blends the UI aesthetic of XP with the worst UX of W11, why would anyone want this?

sojono 3y ago

I'm using Win10 Pro, and I have no ads, no problems with unwanted apps, a sane start menu, and I run almost all non-ms software on top so microsoft's incompetence there is a nonissue. I can also replicate this on win11 but I don't see a reason to upgrade. The way there is fairly simple, actually: OOSU Shutup10: this removes pretty much all the annoyances. https://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10 https://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10 Classicshell: Microsoft is never going to make a start menu that doesn't suck again, but others will. http://www.classicshell.net/ http://www.classicshell.net/ Everything search: classicshell comes with a pretty decent windows search replacement, but you should use this instead. It is so, so fast. https://www.voidtools.com/ https://www.voidtools.com/

pjmlp 3y ago

Except this would mean being stuck on classic Win32 with MFC, and not so goodie .NET Framework 2.0. Unless Windows XP 2024 would also be expect to be similar to macOS and Android, with .NET taking the same role as Swift and Java/Kotlin on those platforms. Hint, this is still far from it on Windows 11, despite the WinRT, WinUI and WinAppSDK adventures.

johnea 3y ago

Just another example of M$ brain damage. What a depressingly limited idea of "everything I want from a new OS": all I want is to be an exploited corporate capture victim...

phmqk76 3y ago

I really like this concept. I see a lot of negativity in the comments over the “Fisher Price” UI, but honestly, this seems much more familiar and easier to navigate than what Windows has become to the average user. This is something that I can see my parents or less technically-inclined siblings or friends breathing a sigh of relief to use. Simple, colorful, easy workflows. It’s why the iPad has a cult following among the 60 and over crowd.

bee_rider 3y ago
I don’t recall XP actually being all that easy to use. It had bright colors, but the menus could get a bit maze-like. IMO XP was familiar more than it was simple to use. iOS is legitimately easy to use.

exabrial 3y ago

I don't understand why people like XP so much. Windows 2000 was the ultimate OS: lean, fast, focused, and absolutely zero crapware installed. No stupid internet accounts needed to run your local OS and it did what it was supposed to do.

tonyedgecombe 3y ago
2000 was also the last version that didn't require activation.
dagmx 3y ago
XP was likely the first memorable intro to windows for many developers in the home context. It was designed to be appealing to look at and a fresh coat of paint. By comparison, you’d be hard pressed to find a non-enthusiast who really remembers the differences between 95/98/ME/2000 because they largely looked similar. Unlike 2000, it was also aimed at home use. The prior home use system was ME which was also not very well received at the time. XP unified the business and home segments. Add to that, the immense PR failure that was Vista, and a very long life for XP, it’s not surprising that it has the most fondness in people’s psyche.
- mrweasel 3y ago
  > 95/98/ME/2000 because they largely looked similar. That was a feature, for me it was 95, 98, NT4, Windows 2000 then it all started falling apart and Linux and MacOSX because the more attractive alternatives. For those who don't remember, we used to call the Windows XP UI the "Fisher Price" UI. It was the first dumbed down Windows UI. I'd agree, the nostalgia for Windows XP is misplaced, when the version before that was the more attractive option. Overall the quality of Windows 2000 just felt like it was way above Windows XP. All the Windows UI inconsistencies started showing up in Windows XP. In the "Windows XP 2024" video I think it's interesting that that the two worst features, the Windows XP UI and the online account activation, have both been preserved.
  - dagmx 3y ago
    Windows 2000 wasn’t the version before Windows XP for most people though. It was Windows ME. Most people would not have experienced 2000. Windows 2000 was the last of the separate business targeted operating systems. Therefore I’d argue the nostalgia isn’t misplaced because most people under 45 just couldn’t have the nostalgia for 2000 to begin with. XP unified the two lines into one OS with multiple SKUs instead of completely different kernels.

51Cards 3y ago

This but on Windows 7 please. It is still my favourite version of Windows.

jolmg 3y ago

3:27 I wasn't expecting this to include a mandatory registration and sign-in to an online account. I thought the inability to have offline/local accounts was one of the hated points of the new Windows OSes.

novok 3y ago
I see you missed the big skip button in the bottom right

hereme888 3y ago

Windows from an alternate universe where companies care mainly about the user's benefit. I think Linux would barely be a thing at all if Microsoft had focused on clean and performant experiences that allowed users more control, flexibility, and privacy. Instead, they put themselves through the pain and expense of pretending to care for OSS. They would have loyal customers due to the trust from a clean Windows experience. Now Linux is nearer to an actual replacement for Windows.

realfeel78 3y ago
> I think Linux would barely be a thing at all if… So, like it still is now.

kleiba 3y ago

Gosh, do I hate the constant animations. I guess I'm one of the last 10 people on Earth who hate phones and this version of Windows definitely looks like it took a lot of inspiration from smart phone OS's.

StillBored 3y ago

The theming/window manager/basic UI groups at MS seem like they are either incompetent or just Aholes. Largely because they seem to remove features during rewrites and then discover they need them back, a few years later. Ex: windows 3.x could do "dark mode", as well as any number of other things that got ripped out. Yes, having a theming manager as complete as the one in say KDE that can create themes to match most current and historic OSs is "hard" but looking at the code doesn't seem like something professionals paid to maintain the largest desktop OS by market share should be incapable of it. So, it seems to me that no one should have been allowed to ship a windows theme/WM that couldn't at least support a win95 style theme. AKA you don't get to merge it until it can do these half dozen simple things. Similarly the task bar, ok nice you created a new one, but can it be positioned on the left side of the screen, or have the start menu moved? Then no, it doesn't get merged.

zlib 3y ago

Setup was nice and slick but once booted I didn't like it. Too much padding on everything, too clunky.

bambax 3y ago

> ... and when the Windows search function was a useful feature I have used Windows since 3.0 (before 3.1) and have never seen a useful search function in any version of Windows. Where was it all this time?

morsch 3y ago
Windows 9x had a decent file search function. It was slow, but reliable. It even included full text search, though I'm not sure how well that worked, I don't think I ever had the patience to use it. I wish modern Gnome had something just like it. I usually use the shell, instead. Here's an overly nitpicky but very in-depth description: http://hallofshame.gp.co.at/find95.htm http://hallofshame.gp.co.at/find95.htm

FooBarWidget 3y ago

I'm old enough to remember when people were skeptical of Windows XP. High resource usage, compatibility problems and the childish look & feel were among the criticisms. There were calls to not upgrade, and to stick to Windows 98. How it despite all that criticism it has become a cult classic is beyond me.

carlosjobim 3y ago

Since this just about GUI appearance, I'd like to mention one of the most beautiful and practical GUI themes for Windows 7, and in my opinion one of the best kept secrets for more than a decade, Shine 2.0: https://www.deviantart.com/zainadeel/art/Shine-2-0-for-Windows-7-172671190 https://www.deviantart.com/zainadeel/art/Shine-2-0-for-Windo... It's been many years since I used anything Windows, but it was always one of the first things I configured with any new install. Looking at the screenshots now, it hasn't aged a bit since it was published in 2010. And the other concepts and themes that guy published around the same time still look fresh. Imagine if Microsoft had discovered him and put him in charge of style!

ChoGGi 3y ago

It might have been gaudy compared to 2000, but I much prefer the colorful XP design to the gray on gray material "design" that's popular nowadays. Only sex perverts don't like clearly defined (button) boundaries... Though my safe word is Fisher Price. /s

apapapa 3y ago

Windows 2000 was windows XP without all the candy interface... Best version ever.

LeFantome 3y ago

Does Windows XP 2024 run 64 bit applications?

unethical_ban 3y ago

I bought a piece of software called StartIsBack that makes windows 11 feel a lot closer to windows 7 with some features and look and feel. $5!

bulldog48 3y ago

[flagged]

bulldog48 3y ago

[flagged]

ksec 3y ago

I think the keypoint here isn't the graphics design, or animations etc as many commented. It is its simplicity. All Modern software tried to introduce more features, and more ways to access the same features or functions. I am not sure if such thing exists or anyone have any pointers. Consider 90% of my time on computer are spend within the browser. I wonder what would it be like if the OS had nothing. Just a Desktop and Browser. No Settings, or even File Explorer. If there is a file it lives on Desktop. The only remaining 10% I think would be a video player. I wonder what would the experience be like. Would I be missing anything.

bee_rider 3y ago
You could install a Linux distro that doesn’t bring a ton along with it (arch will do), install a window manager (not a desktop environment), and go from there.

6R1M0R4CL3 3y ago

Well the only place I use Windows is at work. I went the Linux way and I will kill myself if I had to get back to Windows.

InCityDreams 3y ago
You must really dread going to work.

dusted 3y ago

Things I don't like from this demo: Setup screen: * Flat box instead of real dialog in the installer * No box around the close button * No accents on the next button * Next button provides no feedback to mouse-over or mouse-click * List items (the C: partition) has no borders before it's moused-over, it's basically a point-and-click adventure entity where you have to mouse-over everything to see what can be interacted with Boot screen: * Flat logo is ugly, should have some accents, original XP logo much better * busy-bar is weird, it's segmented but the segments do not animate, rather the entire 3 segments slide around.. again, original is much better. Finishing installation: * Different type of "window" or container now, still rounded border, missing accents. Inconsistent. * Items in list again not indicative of being clickable. * Text-inputs give no feedback on mouse-over or of being selected * Next button still not giving any feedback Third installation screen: Stop already. It was annoying in XP too. Booted: * UI looks like a bad Macromedia flash parody version of XP. * And that settings stuff? Oh god why! Bring back the control panel and the dialogues of XP, those were again MUCH nicer. Okay, this is worse than the orignal in every single way.. Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. - Hanlon's razor, but still, it's really hard to believe someone would honestly see these as improvements. Hope for humanity: lost. What would actually be nice is Windows XP UI, exactly how it was before SP1, but without the bugs and crashes (I _KNOW_ that can be done without messing with the UI) with the ability to run current software on current hardware, with nothing at all changed in the UI.

addicted 3y ago

This is misleading. The demo looks great because of the animated transitions and the large text. But that would be a pain to use as opposed to viewing in a demo. I remember when I used XP I switched to the classic start menu because that worked great. There are still useful things to learn from XP. Depth doesn’t hurt UI/UX. Flatness isn’t the last word in design. Single (or at most dual) lists are better than massive grids of options. We don’t need all the pop ups and promotions. The OS should respond to the user. It shouldn’t keep prompting them.

wkat4242 3y ago

It makes you sign in to a Microsoft account lol, how is that better than windows 11?