GUIs From 1984 to the Present 263
alewar writes "This nice gallery shows the evolution in the appearance of Mac OS, Microsoft Windows and KDE through the years, from the first version to the last available. Not technical, but still interesting to recall some memories from the good old days."
Obligatory disgruntled sarcastic comment (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh yeah, and where is the fucking Amiga desktop screenshot assholes?
Interesting, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
"GUIs"??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Hard comparison (Score:2, Insightful)
Not exactly in depth (Score:4, Insightful)
I might add that there is a distinct lack of console love as well. I demand equal treatment for bash! Show me the ~$
Before you were born:
After you are dead:
DESQview? (Score:4, Insightful)
Good Enough (Score:4, Insightful)
Rail against GUIs if you must, but without some vastly improved display system they have converged a stable solution that will probably stay mostly unchanged much like QWERTY typewriters, not because there isn't anything better possible, but because they are good enough, and are what everyone knows.
"Nice" Gallery? (Score:2, Insightful)
Sad state of GUI development (Score:5, Insightful)
Looking at those 20 year old GUIs always makes me sad, since it shows how basically nothing has changed since then. We got more colors, higher resolutions and a few more mouse buttons, but the basic user interaction is still very much the same as back then and still flawed in many ways. For example no mainstream GUI today manages to properly merge the power of the command line with the ease of use of a mouse driven interface, instead both act side by side, where the most 'integration' you get is lausy copy&paste support of filenames from GUI to CLI, however not the other way around. But thats really just the tip of the iceberg, computer interfaces could do so much more, but most of them don't even try. Don't get me wrong, some transparency, drop shadows and other effects can help, but they are really just polishing of something that is broken at a much deeper level.
As another drastic example of the lack of GUI progress one can look at this NeXTSTEP presentation [google.de] from 1992, even today that video still shows plenty of features which a normal Linux or Windows still can't compete with and with MacOSX it doesn't really look that much better, while it is actually based on NeXTSTEP, it has allocated a whole bunch of cruft from old MacOS, which doesn't really make the overall experince all that good.
It goes to show you....Youth. (Score:1, Insightful)
Since when is VMS, "UNIX"?
Re:What? No Amiga GUIs? (Score:4, Insightful)
It would have been nice to see some pics of the Amiga GUIs, year by year to show how much nicer they were at the time compared to Apple's and Microsoft's.
And NeXTstep. The NeXTstep GUI circa 1992 looked a great deal like Mac OS X circa 2001 -- it was amazingly better than its contemporaries.
Re:Obligatory disgruntled sarcastic comment (Score:4, Insightful)
Did you enjoy it or not?
I personally couldn't care less why the blog was created, nor do I particularly care if people are posting things just to make money. I judge articles based on whether or not I enjoyed them and that's it.*
* Acknowledging, of course, that some sites go so overboard with the 500 page articles (composed of 200 total words) filled with ads that even if it might be the greatest article ever I don't read it.
merging command line and gui (Score:4, Insightful)
How would you do this? A GUI is intended to provide simplicity by limiting choice to only those options relevant within a given context. Further, it uses visual metaphor to classify objects and data. CLIs use symbolic representation and grammar to organize files and actions, and as such are closer to reading, writing, and speech than a visual interpretation of system state. It's the difference between looking at a graph vs. a table of numbers - both portray the same information, but require different regions of the brain to interpret. Perhaps the problem you lament is not the computer interface, but limitations and differences between how people manipulate visual compared to manipulating the system with symbols and words. These are two distict areas in the brain - why should they work alike?
All fairly similar! (Score:4, Insightful)
The basic premises of all these UIs is the same. This leads me to believe that in another 20yrs we will still be using the same folder/file idea that we have today. This is, I think, a good thing. It means that our damn grandkids won't be able to make fun of us for not being able to use the computer! But we can still tell them to get off our damn lawns!
Re:Obligatory disgruntled sarcastic comment (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Obligatory disgruntled sarcastic comment (Score:3, Insightful)
These kids today... They think personnal computers started with the Macintosh, the IBM PC and.... hum... Linux, which is younger than anything else on the market ATM, AFAIK.
Re:Obligatory disgruntled sarcastic comment (Score:3, Insightful)
In the days of win2k and ME (Score:3, Insightful)
Still one of the sexiest in existence, people with 2 button mice suffered and they never really fixed that but it's a pretty pretty baby.
It's also one of the smallest and quickest GUI's around.
Wish it shipped standard