Why can't there be any DE looking like this?!

File: PootOS2.png (10KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 512x384px

Or this.

>>57883112
Install solus

I feel you OP. That shit is comfy as fuck.

CDE

File: system8.gif (33KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 640x480px

Mmmm

Because looks > function.

If you had an OS that used as small of a footprint on the system as this people might not want to update to the new version.

Offices would still be using 400MHz machines on DOS if they could get away with it.

File: Mac_OS_9_screenshot_2.png (74KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 1024x768px

How is there no OS9 DE?

On a side note, what's the best mac I can get to run OS9?

>>57883116
>kawaiik
Please tell me that's an actual thing.

File: Twentieth_Anniversary_Macintosh.jpg (27KB, 560x450px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 560x450px

>>57883213

>>57883213
That's like asking what the best pc to run ME on would be.
Or what the best spoon to eat shit with would be.

>>57883252
http://androidarts.com/kawaiik/kawaiik.htm

>>57883112
'cause we aren't in the 90s anymore anon

>>57883112
Because it looks like shit and you only like it because it's old and different.

>>57883212
That shit has no more function than any modern interface, if anything it has far less.

>>57883274
Not quite what I expected, still nice.

>>57883283
'member no ISIS?
'member no 9/11?
'member no government spying?

>>57883271
>Or what the best spoon to eat shit with would be.
The answer to that, I'm guessing, is "anything works". But new PCs can't install Windows ME so that doesn't make sense

File: 1477402269002.jpg (335KB, 1127x1401px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 1127x1401px

>>57883116
Wha-What is this?
Where does one find it?

>>57883283
By that logic retro 90's UI should be making a comeback soon

>>57883297
Check out the file listing icons.
http://androidarts.com/kawaiik/
>>57883310
http://androidarts.com/Amiga/SBC.htm

File: Panda Suit.png (22KB, 100x120px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 100x120px

>>57883325
Ah, thanks man.

>>57883116
>PootOS
Is this real?

File: 1438453024035.gif (179KB, 350x197px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 350x197px

>>57883325
This website is pretty neat.

>>57883112
You really need to ask yourself why, when there are so many available themes out there, that no one labours over making something like this. Could it be perhaps that the aesthetic, while the best available at the time, has actually been surpassed in both form and functionality?

>>57883145
Fuck off kevin.

>>57883116
I'd love the ever loving crap outta this... Someone really needs to work this in to like something cool\niche like portable rPis or something

>>57883386
>A E S T H E T I C

>>57883112
Because most people use screens with a resolution higher than QVGA?
I'm all for a minimal UI but it doesn't have to look ancient (I don't get why shit so much on flat design, it's the same concept as aesthetic™ but doesn't look like crap with minimal bloat)

>>57883301
Ooo, I 'member! 'member no kevin?

File: Quake1Rangerette.jpg (168KB, 479x730px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 479x730px

>>57883274
omg amazing

>>57883315
Hopefully retro 90's anything makes a comeback soon.

>>57883213
Someone made a theme for MATE (i think) that looks like OS9 and has the control strip.
As for best PPC mac that can boot OS9, it depends. there are mods that allow it to run on the FW800 G4, but the non FW800 MDD is the highest one that it can run on without special tools. Put in a high end dual cpu and you have a nice system.

>>57883474
Hopefully le Windows 95 was the dawn of home computing meme doesn't ruin it.

File: 16col-Icons-2015k.gif (132KB, 1280x1352px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 1280x1352px

interesting site

>>57883462

Its a shame it would be running ontop of X, its destined to be slow garbage.

You will never get lightening fast UI's like the Amiga.

>>57883602
>>57883462
Just install RISC OS

>>57883602
Isn't there some new alternative to X?

>>57883802
Wayland.

>>57883602
>Its a shame it would be running ontop of X
>what is Wayland

File: 1481084729811.jpg (2MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1080px

>>57883530

>>57883112
Because unlike you we don't have autism that acts up when ever something changes.

>>57883813
>>57883816
I'll be surprised if wayland has cool retro WMs like the ones OP posted

>>57883853
Except that most changes in the past decade were objectively shit. You don't need autism to be inclined to oppose decent things being swapped for shiny shit, do you.

>>57883868
What are the properties of >>57883112, >>57883116 or >>57883175 that make them objectively better interfaces to, let's say, XP? Aesthetics don't count, as these are not objective.

also
>in the past decade
Win 7 came out 7 years and XP 15 years ago. Braindamages like W8 are much more recent.

>>57883531
With this much premade content, couldn't someone relatively easily make a theme in linux with this?

>>57884365
7 was just a bearable Vista. But a short intermezzo in the Vista/8/8.1/10 sea of garbage.

>>57883116
Holy fuck, that's beautiful

>>57884459
There might be issues since they're all pixelart of variable sizes. Also, I don't think any preexisting DE supports dual-state icons.

>>57883602
>The Xorg is slow meme
How to tell if someones never actually used linux and just regurgitates /g/ memes

>>57885040

I literally haven't touched anything but Linux in nearly half a decade.

>>57885040
It's slow for what it is. The Pi 1 shat the bed with just Openbox going.

>>57883816
Wayland is slower than X you fucking gooks.

The only fast graphics are done with direct hardware access thru a framebuffer via the kernel. That's it. That's why windows does that.

Alternatively, a single address space that you can poke pixels to directly. (memory mapped graphics with no context switching).

Good luck, unix faggots.

Alternatively, download AROS and start fucking coding.

>>57883116
Now imagine this in 1440p

>>57886202
Yeah, imagine it in a meme resolution.

Why the fuck don't we use TV standards like the old days

1. 720P
2. 1080P
3. 4k
4. 8k

Obviouly 3 and 4 are not anywhere near possible for 60fps at the moment.

Fuck sakes computers are shit nowadays.

1985: Chose a res. Pal or NTSC. DONE.

>>57883212
Woah, I've somehow only just realised that new windows versions serve absolutely no purpose for business employees who just need to use email / word processing / database access tools.

Is the whole reason businesses upgrade to keep getting security updates?

Why do businesses willing cuck themselves when they could save so much time and effort using debian or something instead? They'd save a tonne on training costs too because desktop environments don't change dramatically every new version.

>>57886232
>implying you could choose most of the time.

But I get your point. For all the talk of "just works" these days we sure do overcomplicate things.

>>57886232
Because monitors aren't TVs?

>>57884365
these look stylish and grey while xp looks like bozo the clown.
also i can say that the UX of mac os is way better and logical than of windows - spatial finder etc

>>57886311
Because there is nothing as powerful as excel on linux

that is the sole reason

>>57886311
The short answer is because most people think computers are a consumable, like the engine oil in a car or brake pads.

Ever heard a normie say that their computer is getting "worn out," or use language like that to describe how slow they get with Window's shitty "updates"?

>>57886325
lol, wut?

Clearly you are missing out on the core concepts being shown in this thread.

Don't you get it? 'monitors' are a fucking meme. There is no reason for them to exist.

>>57886311
an accounting trick known as depreciation

>>57886363
Why doesn't some company make some software that is then? If that's the sole reason, then surely they could make that software and licence it for less than the cost of windows + office, everyone switches to that, business save money and they would make millions.

>>57886434
patents

>>57886396
This combined with planned obsolescence and a little bit of swindling.

>Hey, that thing you have that still works perfectly mysteriously doesn't work perfectly any more, oh, but what's this? New hardware and software that WILL work perfectly.
>Better open that wallet.

>>57883213
I've had to use OS9 recently for work and moving/copying files and directories really sucks. The filename character limit really sucks. That it automatically changes characters to ... really sucks.

UI looks cool and I like the task switcher thing in the top right. Also why did Apple get rid of shading/rolling up windows in OS10

>>57886434
Because Microsoft will just break compatibility with that program forcing that developer to have to always be working on compatibility rather than actually improving the software until the FUD does it's job and they go under.

File: oldsoftsbetter.png (200KB, 2800x600px)

200KB, 2800x600px

Business software is a meme.

Have a look a pic related.

>>57886311
Usually one or more of the executives are running a little scam where they lease the computers to the company through a second shell company for their own profit

Thus the 1 or 2 year replacement cycle for computers that really could last 10 years

>>57883213
What always surprises me about UIs of this era is how much they fit on to the screen. I have a 1024x768 screen on this laptop and I'd have to spend a long time making its real estate as efficient as that.

>>57886500
I don't think it's really fair to point the finger at LibreOffice entirely. I mean, it is free. Wordsworth was a commercial product.

>>57886434
Because company x already has 10 years of xlsx spreadsheets they aren't going to convert to your new software

>>57886232
The monitor meme covered by:
>>57886502

This is why standards matter. This is why using consumer (ie cheap and available) technology is smarter! There is no reason that an lcd 1080 or 730 TV shouldn't be used as a monitor. Many TVs now support frequency scaling beyond 240HZ using hardware--yet we fuck around with 24fps video being murdered by software/hardware rendering. Why not just directly dump it to the tv via memory mapped io? Oh yeah...cuz that was done in the 80s and isn't cool anymore.

>>57886311
I don't think businesses ever willingly upgrade. New windows versions are rarely installed just because. But when a new PC gets bought, I imagine they put the newest windows on that.
>business employees who just need to use email / word processing / database access tools.
I think this is an idea that we need to get rid of. Of course there's a lot of email reading/writing, word processing and database management. But you cannot make profits like that, there most often is some other software and it's where the actual productive things happen. I'm currently in an internship at a Geology company. We have a shitton of software which is special to our field, and it's proprietary and exclusive to windows (or at least I assume). Like the stuff at http://www.goldensoftware.com/products/surfer or ArcGIS. Or the program on our field laptops that is able to connect to the groundwater loggers in the field.

>>57885472
the pi 1 shat the bed with anything because it was a steaming pile of shit that couldn't even outrun a 20 year old MIPS chip

>>57886626
Most offices are sales oriented and sales staff just use salesforce, word, and excel pretty much

>>57883116
The most kawaii OS I've ever seen

>>57886311
some insight in this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmIZRNbkCKc
tl;dr the guy who's been doing accounting for 20 years is willing to only use the shitty proprietary software.

>>57886703
Not watched yet, but does he have a reason, or did he just go all babby duck over it?

>>57886703
He has a 40/5 connection what the fuck does he expect with a 5mbps upload?

>>57886864
That's a lot of accounting software. To put it in to context he could have sent 5 copies of War and Peace in that time.

>>57886922
>To put it in to context he could have sent 5 copies of War and Peace in that time.

Is that including all the overhead?

>>57886966
How can it possibly have 18MB of overhead? That should be the size of the software itself.

Plus if you listen he says it was trash even running on hardware.

>>57886703
GnuCash is pretty good

Someone should tell him

>>57886703
>pays $2,500 for software for accounting
>pays an accountant on top of that
>complains about money issues

Fucking idiot. He deserves his shitty software.

>the government can randomly say "you owe us money, unless you can prove otherwise."

Land of the "Free".

>>57886557
I don't even get why super high-resolution screens exist on computers, nor giant "monitors."

I mean, you're sat 2-3 feet from the screen.

>>57883274
That site is really fucking comfy

>implying you can't rice that

>>57883325
is he updating this site?

File: a.png (268KB, 570x409px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 570x409px

>>57883116
that looks very system 7-esque

>>57883213
one time years ago i themed up xfce to look reasonably close

File: nope.gif (571KB, 500x330px) Image search: [Google]

571KB, 500x330px

>>57883112

>>57886189
>The only fast graphics are done with direct hardware access thru a framebuffer via the kernel.
http://www.directfb.net/

File: a.png (63KB, 2560x1440px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 2560x1440px

>>57886202
well that took a bit of effort

>>57887800
>HDfags will defend this.

>>57887378
Theme plz or it didn't happen.

>>57883325
thanks pham

>>57883816
Wayland is just a meme and poised to be worse performer in some regard.

>>57887800
IT actually looks good, the icons have a nice size, and you could just make the windows bigger.

>>57886500
Did that actually run on a 7mhz processor?

Wow, how did we end up here? It's not like modern word processors even have any significantly better features than old software did.

I wish modern software was still comfy and unbloated.

>>57886500
too bad you're neglecting to mention that not only are those ballpark estimates that aren't binding, but they're also well within the grasp of anything made within the last 15 years even at face value, the vast majority of software back then would barely run on a five year old system
>television or monitor listed as a selling point like there's even a difference between the two anymore in the modern era
now this is straw grasping
>>57892155
you can do a lot with a little when you really put some work into it, especially on an Amiga where the hardware was so fucking pathetic they were forced to, those things were garbage even before they rolled off the assembly line

it's not like a basic word processor is a particularly complex piece of software anyway

>>57883112
>>57883116
You mean like MacOS Finder or Amiga Workbench?

>>57883112
There could be if you'd get off your lazy ass and create it.

>>57892762
>especially on an Amiga where the hardware was so fucking pathetic they were forced to
What are you talking about? They had an amazing design for their time with their chipset, the big boxes where up high with Macintosh workstations of the time and the budget all-in-ones just needed a CPU upgrade to be top line for their time.

>>57893213
>they had an amazing design for their time with their chipset
literally all they had and even that wasn't that special by the time the '90s rolled around and 24-bit color was old news in the real high end
>the big boxes where up high with Macintosh workstations
they were still running vanilla 68000s and maxing out at a paltry 9 MB of RAM while Mac IIs were getting 40 MHz '030s and 128 MB
even after they got it up with the 3000 they still always remained a year behind the high end macs
>of the time and the budget all-in-ones just needed a CPU upgrade to be top line for their time.
notice how I said "off the assembly line"
besides, you could say that for anything else at the time, you could buy accelerators for macs and straight up board swap a PC, as stock systems they were garbage years behind the curve from a hardware perspective

>>57893213
>be top line for their time.
You don't know what top of the line actually means, then.

>>57894029
>they were still running vanilla 68000s
What are you talking about? The 1200 used a '020 (budget machine), the 3000 used a '030 and 4000 used a '040 by default
Also big boxed didn't have a memory limit of 9MB? They had SIMM sockets on the motherboard accepting way over 9MB, maybe you're confusing it for chipmem?
The 4000 came with 18MB default. Mostly memory size buying them from retail depended on the shop, some sold them with more memory as a bonus.

>notice how I said "off the assembly line"
The machine itself was still great, it was just the CPU.

>>57894047
>You don't know what top of the line actually means, then.
For consumer hardware, obviously.

>>57894029
>40 MHz '030s and 128 MB
No Macintosh also sold with 128MB retail, typically 8MB

>>57894131
was bringing up the 2000 for that particular comparison, which ships with a regular 68k and according to what I could turn up maxes out at 1 MB onboard + 8 MB in zorro expansions

the 4000 is pretty nice even if it wasn't alien tech compared to the best other platforms had to offer, though I was never into the 3000 mostly just I'm not into the design moreso than the underlying hardware

>The machine itself was still great, it was just the CPU.
dunno though, with a CPU upgrade in a wedge you're still strangled on the same old mainboard, slow-ass IDE disks, and generally expansion-resistant chassis, the software could certainly make up for it, but the hardware itself just does not impress me (I mean, other than the level you can still hotrod them the fuck out and extend them way past their otherwise useful life, even Macs couldn't hold a candle to some of that shit)

>>57894146
of course not, but you could totally configure them with 128MB if you had more money than sense, I'm talking about maximums anyway, not necessarily what they commonly shipped with, Mac IIs had crazy high RAM ceilings, and from personal experience it really isn't too uncommon to see them being taken advantage of, most of my IIs have 16+ at least, sometimes 32 or more

even with 8 MB, that's still 8x the 1-2 MB base a 2000 had

>>57894391
>what I could turn up maxes out at 1 MB onboard + 8 MB in zorro expansions
That's the limitation of the 16bit bus of the original 68000

>>57894499
yeah I know, but didn't the 68000 have a 24-bit bus?

>>57894547
Oh yeah, the address bus was 24-bit, it was the data bus that was 16-bit.
Of course, else it would not be even able to address 8MB.

>>57883112
Would use in 2016 + 1
Dat 90's vaporwave goodnes

>>57894391
>slow-ass IDE disks
Don't know why they cheaped out with the later models with ATA instead of SCSI.
It's 3.6MB/s, but the Macintoshes of the time only had SCSI controllers that went up to 6MB/s too.

>>57883446
>>57883470
these

File: who put you on the planet ugh.jpg (76KB, 335x525px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 335x525px

>>57883274
>3/4 of the page is artistic design, sketches and "story"
>three hand-wavey paragraphs on gameplay

>almost ten years in "development"
>barely a storyboard for a trailer

Pretty disappointing desu.

>>57883274
he needs to cut out the pantsu shit

File: gemacc.png (8KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 640x480px

>>57883112

File: kumiko.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

is this the new desktop thread

File: xerox.jpg (222KB, 737x535px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 737x535px

>>57883112

>>57896473
Note:
No menu bar (that was an Apple thing).
Only one program showing.
No windows overlapping between programs.
Interface is document-driven, not application-driven.

>>57894131
>tfw no 100MHz 68080

>>57896883
http://www.apollo-core.com/

feel free to fabricate one based on it

>>57896328
You want the girls to be bottomless instead?

>>57888306
Here's my version
https://github.com/wallace-aph/System6-theme

>>57896845
>Only one program showing.
>No windows overlapping between programs.
Que?
What are "Brother Domink" and "DOS and Lotus data"?

>>57896080
was definitely a cost-cutting measure, regular SCSI disks were expensive enough, couldn't imagine how much of a bitch it would be to ship entry-level consumer systems with 2.5'' ones on top of it

>but the Macintoshes of the time only had SCSI controllers that went up to 6MB/s too.
you're right, doesn't seem they got fast SCSI until the highest-end nubus powermacs came out

you could maybe argue that the drives available at the time couldn't reach those speeds anyway I guess, would be interesting to test it out, but it's interesting that I've never seen a II or Quadra with a SCSI controller thrown in