3 ms·
The funniest thing (to me) is not that the author doesn't like desktop icons, but that the problem had been largely solved many times for many decades...
by readthenotes1 2y ago
The funniest thing (to me) is not that the author doesn't like desktop icons, but that the problem had been largely solved many times for many decades...
- userbinator 2y agoWindows 95
- cwillu 2y agoWindows 95 had a fixed icon size with no previews, a restricted set of possible panels, and was released in an era when monitor cables were held on to the graphics cards with thumbscrews.
- RedShift1 2y agoWhat's the point you're trying to make?
- vel0city 2y agoProbably that Windows 95 didn't really cover a lot of the challenges of desktop icons in modern computing systems as it was greatly limited at the time.
- II2II 2y agoIt could also be argued that Windows 95 marked the start of this complexity, at least in PC land. Prior to that, there was very little communication between the OS and the hardware regarding configuration. When it did happen (e.g. monitor resolution, speed of a serial port, etc.), it was directed by the operating system rather than by the hardware.
- pjmlp 2y agoOS/2 did it first on PC land.
- cwillu 2y ago“Largely solved [aside from the edge cases I don't care about]”
- njtransit 2y agoAll of the edge cases were self-inflicted. They could have picked a different UX that would have had a much smaller set of edge cases to care about.