Where is this all going?

So you want your OS to use more Hardware resources? Thats basically what you are saying

>>59507386
well, your linux install would not run on your win 95 setup. Neither would any modern OS so there is that.

>>59507418
im pointing out the scalling that happend with the hardware. i would say that not the same type of development on the os side happend. not the usage of resources but the scalling of abillity.

>>59507386
>My first PC had 12mhz and came with windows 95
bullshit my man, 286-class systems couldn't even boot 95 let alone run it
regardless, typical windows 95 systems were very much limited in a lot of ways, I should know because I regularly use that class of hardware "productively" for the fuck of it
>if i compare win95 to linux today the changes seem not as big as the development on the hardware end
modern Windows NT and Linux are leagues ahead of the god awful kludge that was 95 under the hood, just because the proven interface hasn't changed drastically for the sake of it doesn't mean nobody has paid any attention to it

>>59507481
What do you htink computers are mang? What else should it be doing that it is not / is not capable of? In relation to the hardware. I see where you're coming from but the logic is flawed.

Why bother making a thin OS if everyone has multiple GB of RAM, multi-core processors, and TBs of storage?

I remember being disgusted when it took my sisters new PC running Windows 10 longer to start the calculator than my amiga, and I actually made a point of timing it I was so shocked. It probably could have loaded instantly, but they saw fit to put a cartoon of the calculator being loaded before the calculator loaded. And yes, all UI animations are are cartoons.

>>59507481
what the fuck are you expecting? what new paradigms are we lacking? why do you think that hardware and software are one and the same and the wheel must be constantly re invented so kids can say "haha look how far we've come xD i love le science" while stroking themselves off?

this plebeian obsession with progress for the sake of progress is as regressive as it is obnoxious

>>59507656
it's not really as mindblowing as you think it is, those operating systems were bog simple most of the time and keeping system components in ROM was very common. in the end the differences between those two loading times are worthless anyway, in the modern era you're far more inhibited by your own thought process when it comes to getting shit done than the half-second loading animation on your calculator you see once a session

>>59507489
>bullshit my man, 286-class systems couldn't even boot 95 let alone run it
wasnt a 286-class cpu but 386

>>59507778
>what new paradigms are we lacking
im not really saying that there is a lack of paradigm but in all honesty the evolution of the desktop right now looks something like console>desktop>tiles and then a "oh shit we fucked up" row back (and that is true for MS as well as Canonical&KDE)

>>59507795
sure as fuck wasn't if it was clocked at 12 MHz, by the rest of your specs you probably had a DX-33 or maybe even a DX-40 or something

>>59507838
there's only so many ways to manage a system that makes sense, right now we're indeed flailing around doing what the fuck ever with the tablet meme shit that hopefully will go away or become well integrated with time

>>59507489
The issue isn't really what's under the hood but what's on top of it. You can run a minimal Linux install with AbiWord and GNUmeric for office tasks on something that would struggle with XP.

You can just compare what GNOME or KDE will ask from the system to MATE or XFCE and get another taste of this.

I really don't buy this argument that the base system does so much more, when they're essentially both the same as ancient server OSs that ran on far less.

Eh, before Windows 8 came out I used to complain how they've never really evolved the desktop metaphor in the last couple of decades.

Windows 8 tried to do that, but you can argue it's just like if the desktop metaphor reset back to its primitive era, before it evolved into the version that had stuck for so many decades.

I dunno, man.

the OS shouldn't be the star of the show

I feel you op. I imaged that in today's time we would have Non-rectangle user interfaces with cool round pulse like visualizers subtle integrated into the main gui and all the cool shit you could only do with external monitor hardware. but nooo, It's the same fucking rectangle grey/white shit every single release and our gpu's are sitting there with nothing to do. Even 3D interfaces with tiling like features would be feasible today but nobody wants to do something like this.

Damn, how I loath the ancient filesystems we have to deal with. There isn't even a tag based filesystem on the horizon and I though it wouldn't take long to ditch that old busted folder based shit.

There is no innovation.

>>59507886
people buy windows to get windows
and with windows 8 they sold metro
if they sold metro OS it and windows as seperate products it might would not been such a drama

>>59507886
> I used to complain how they've never really evolved the desktop metaphor in the last couple of decades

Why? It worked and was perfectly suited to a 2D plane manipulated by a precise pointer.

>but you can argue it's just like if the desktop metaphor reset back to its primitive era

Hardly. Unless you mean "things were big" at which point I would point out that was due to hardware limitations and not intentional design. Once they started getting more screen estate things started to scale down to a more comfortable level by the early 90s.

>>59507925
>I imaged that in today's time we would have Non-rectangle user interfaces
There's a reason we don't: there's no advantage to it, there's nothing that it's more efficient for. About the only appeal is having your computer look like something from a movie.

>>59507979
>something from a movie
Yes, and god damn I want to have something cool to look at when I show something to people on my riced fapmachine.
Well, at least I have a blurred visualizer behind my taskbar, that should count for something I hope.

>>59507386
>12MHz CPU
>Windows 95
Bullshit
12MHz CPUs are way too old to run anything non CLI based. Window 95 is too new for a fucking 12MHz CPU.

>>59508002
he probably doesn't remember clearly any more, autismo.

>>59508002
>12MHz CPUs are way too old to run anything non CLI based.

The Amiga 500 had 7MHz and ran a GUI.

>>59508002

i can't be bothered to look it up but I'm pretty sure Windows 95 required a 486, and the slowest 486 was at least 25mhz. OP probably meant to type 120mhz

>>59508002
Nah, you could run early versions of Windows on something like that.

>>59507996
Most people don't really give a shit how flashy the UI on your computer is.

>>59507386
Mostly, that's why most servers are virtualized.

>>59508002
>i386dx
at the time it ran well enough to do the normal stuff you would do(use textpad paint and run dos games) i bought it cheap used from my neighbore at the time (100$)

>>59508019
The Amiga was powered by the smugness of every middle-class brit throughout the 90s. The IBM architecture is weighed down by American apathy.

File: 1480557207746.jpg (293KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

293KB, 1024x683px

>>59507386
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called "Linux", and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project.

There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called "Linux" distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

>>59508049
From memory, the 386 our family had couldn't handle Win95, but a 486 we later got could... just.

>>59508068
Can't be true, how often do you think I had to "fix" Aero for people because they switched to the basic theme and though it was horrible? They want transparency and colors, not white/grey shit.

>>59508091
there where several versions of win95
the first release could run on 386 later releases i think win95 b demanded more but also offered usb support i think

>a full installation of CUPS is 100-120MB
>full hp driver package asks for 2GB free space
>an almost complete installation of Win95 was <100MB and it could print

File: hqdefault.0.0.jpg (155KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 1600x900px

>>59508125
>and it could print
proof that

>>59508139
http://lmgtfy.com/?t=i&q=windows+95+printing

>>59508125
but storage is cheap just buy a new hard drive poorfag lol

File: 901a_5.gif (4KB, 382x151px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 382x151px

>>59508165
without offering your firstborn you cant even print a test page with win 95

>>59508097
You get a few idiots demanding something flashy, but most people just want something basic and functional. The first thing most of my co-workers do when setting up a new PC is set it to a 'Windows classic' theme.

>>59508117
I dunno, I still don't recall Windows 95 being able to run on a 386 at all - or at least, not run anything resembling acceptably. On the other hand, we didn't use Win95 until we replaced our dying 386 with a Pentium, and everyone else I knew already had at least a 486 when they went Win95.

>>59508185
I think you're wrong. Most people have swallowed the marketing that computers are toys rather than tools. They totally believe that simply using the computer itself should be the "experience" and not what using it for.

>>59507939
I was talking about how Windows 8 is like Windows 1.

>>59508185
>>59508200
How can we get innovation in this bitch if we only use windows 95 mode? There needs to be done something differently to open the doors to better things, if we limit ourself to that then we have already given up. Also, having something cool/interesting to look at can help motivation and imagination and this could lead to people actually trying to write something more interesting. Of course most of that will be useless shit but it's still required if we don't want to stagnate. Not everything must revolve around enterprise culture.

Whatever, it's probably already too late. Computing already begins to not matter and people will just get closed ecosystems that do one thing and buy their gadgets according to what's popular or what they need. I have no faith in the desktop market.

>>59507925
Tag-based? That's thinking small. Tags are just one of many metadata attributes. A relational filesystem, (which stores files in relational databases,) tends to support a lot more. Microsoft was working on WinFS back in the day which would've been part of Vista but it got cancelled. The closest thing we got now is liquidFOLDERS, which doesn't even support Windows Explorer anymore. (Although you can get a 32-bit-only old version that does support it on the Wayback Machine, which does support valid license keys you can purchase today.) (There's no difference between new versions of liquidFOLDERS and old versions other than that old versions support Windows Explorer.)

But the thing is, when you implement it, it usually doesn't fully work. Like, compare the Music Store in Longhorn 4074 and a Music Store I created in liquidFOLDERS. Longhorn 4074 has the copying-to-the-store process take forever, and it only works if the screen doesn't blank or go to screensaver. When it's done you see only a tiny percentage of your music is actually processed by WinFS. But for the music that did work at least it can stack your music by any possible music-related attribute, and it can make stacks of different attributes within other stacks. Also, the nature of the relational filesystem means searching through the folder I copied the music from, (i.e. a huge mess,) is REALLY fast, but it only works by name.

By contrast, copying to my Musif Store in liquidFOLDERS had a normal length of time, and it recognized all of my music, but not all of the attributes were recognized. I could stack by Album, but not by Artist. You also can't do stacks within stacks. But, hey, at least the searching is fast with it too according to this video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gmoXy4wGGCI

My point is it actually has to work first before it can be viable.

>>59508238
I dunno, to a certain extent there's nowhere really to go in terms of UI. There are ways to improve it, but not radical change in terms of how things look.

>>59508238
>having something cool/interesting to look at can help motivation and imagination and this could lead to people actually trying to write something more interesting

You speak like a fucking shill.

>>59508238
Stagnation is better than useless shit for the sake of having useless shit. If something is as good as we can make it right now, the correct thing to do with it is to not fuck with it.

>>59508049
I had a 386 computer on a 33MHz that (i think) ran windows 95. I seem to remember us getting a 486 for 98

>>59507452
>what is Damn small linux