Where did it all go so wrong?

>>59718963
steve jobs death

>>59718969
No I think his birth was where things went wrong.

>>59718963
Internet Explorer? For real?

>>59718963
10.4, Panther was the perfect OS

The same thing that went wrong with everything about technology.

>Hey, what if the using of the device was the experience rather than what you're using it for?

The same thinking that got us interactive web pages and animated window boarders.

>GNU+Linux will never look this good.

I remember how Apple was proud of PowerPC back then.

File: 1491220686365.jpg (39KB, 414x720px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 414x720px

>>59719455
>the using
>window boarders

>>59718963
> Where did it all go so wrong?
After NeXT buyout, I suppose.
They worked on a better version of classic MacOS, but they stopped in favor of NeXTStep.

>>59719524
I mean you can make linux essentially look exactly like this...

>>59719047
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_for_Mac

There also used to be Internet Explorer for UNIX too.

>>59719944
You can't

>>59718963
what is wrong with macOS, aside from the fact it is locked to certain hardware?

it is the most robust, functional OS out of the box with all the power of linux while offering more software compatibility. from a software standpoint, its a UNIX marvel.

>>59719960
>>59719524
Use a good WM like windowmaker

>>59719944
i wish I had a desktop that looked like Mac OS 9.

>>59720002
Use xfce and certain themes and you can get pretty damn close to it's look.

Now responsiveness and functionality is a different story.

>>59719991
I use linux now, but I don't really have a problem with Modern macOS, I just miss the simplicity, responsiveness, and especially aesthetics of their OS's before OSX

>>59719857
All of Apple's own attempts at making a modern, next-generation Mac OS (Pink / Taligent, Copland) were doomed by infighting, feature creep, and terrible management. They spent the better part of a decade on these various failed projects before finally buying NeXT and saving Apple from bankruptcy.

>>59719547
PowerPC kicked ass back then. But Motorola became Freescale became shit, and IBM decided there was no money in selling processors to <10% of the consumer PC market.

>>59719072
10.4 was tiger u tard

>>59718963
Javascript

>>59718963
the internet

>>59719047
internet explorer for mac was better than the default browser back back then.

bronnen.net/int has a cool theme inspired by os9

>>59721226
might want to brush up on your english

>>59719857
Next buyout was the best thing that ever happened to Apple. Gil Amelio, among others, almost ran that company into the ground. MacOS needed so much work to remain relevant, straight up replacement was the best option. Horrid multitasking, poor networking, 3d api nobody but Apple used. It was for the best.

File: hello.gif (149KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1024x768px

>>59718963
Without all of the nostalgia shit, it was buggy, randomly froze sometimes even more so than Windows. Certainly Windows 2k was far more stable even with all the driver shenanigans and even better than OSX when it released.
What I do miss from 9.2 is how nice and clean it looked. Same with Win2k. I wish I could get to use either OSX/Win with those looks today.

>>59721520
MacOS 7.5 was the best.

>>59721520
I wish we could go back to professional looking UIs, rather than everything today trying to be all warm and friendly. I'd be lying if I said I hated how Windows 10 looks, especially after the shitshow that was 8 aesthetically, but it's still a step in the wrong direction.

File: Scott_Forstall.png (490KB, 975x673px) Image search: [Google]

490KB, 975x673px

>>59720469
>They spent the better part of a decade on these various failed projects before finally buying NeXT and saving Apple from bankruptcy

Guess why? Pic related.

File: hotlinemac.gif (87KB, 866x589px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 866x589px

>>59721567
I believe it was more stable, but honestly I barely remember because I was more of a DOS/Windows guy. I used a lot 8 and 9 when I started working, it was a pain in the ass for some stuff and super comfy for other shit. I used Hotline a lot to download weird shit, even tv series in realmedia format.
Win 2000 was as comfy as OS9 but also stable if you didn't have any shit hardware with shit drivers.

Guys I really, really want to buy an old mac that can natively run either 9.2 or system 7.
I mostly just want it to fuck around with. Maybe play some old games. I remember playing Warcraft II on my friends mac when I was little and it was so fucking comfy...
Any suggestion for what machine I should get? Should I just get something like an iMac G3 or a Powerbook G4? Please give advice thanks.

File: e2cc514d314c1b59359b2baa12a66ca853a9aaf9.png (165KB, 454x454px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 454x454px

Decide to catch up on Windows. Start target people who don't know how to use a computer. Now people who don't know how to use a computer have Apple computers. Mac OS become a laming OS like Windows.

>>59721765
SheepShaver on a vm? If not, just look around what was the last mac that was out before the ones that came with OSX preinstalled. Remember that you need PPC macs, if I'm right not bigger than a G4.

>>59722076
>SheepShaver on a vm
I could do that, but I'd really like to get the old hardware. I'll do some more research.

>>59722236
Power Mac G4 is your safest bet, I think G5s came with OSX already and were compatible but you could not run only OS9 there.

File: photon.png (139KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1024x768px

>>59718963
There is something about late 90s GUI design that makes me warm and fuzzy inside.

It can't be nostalgia since the first computer i had (that wasn't someone else's machine) came with win xp.

>>59719603
Just read it with an indian accent and it makes perfect sense, anon

>>59718963
it's the same interface
what are you talking about

>>59720064
Got a link to some themes? All the ones I've tried fuck up buttons

>>59722378

Jesus fuck, the invasion is real.

PAJEET OUT

System specs got too good, programmers became lazy, normies got more shallow, even enthusiasts got tricked into thinking raw increases in numbers are the be-all-end-all.

Basically it's all more evidence that humans can't be left to their own devices. Hobbes was right.

File: IMG_0314.png (462KB, 575x657px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 575x657px

>>59721592
NeXT wasn't just one person. There were other big players who joined Apple like Avie Tevanian, Bertrand Serlet, Bud Tribble, Jon Rubinstein, and Hair Force One himself.

Forstall's claim to fame is having led the initial development of the iPhone OS based on Mac OS X, but he was apparently also an insufferable asshole who no one wanted around after Steve Jobs died.

>>59721312
There was no default browser. It was either that or Netscape.

But IE5 for Mac was really good. Actually standards-compliant for once. It had a brand new rendering engine written from scratch, which they threw away instead of replacing shitty Trident with it on Windows.

>>59721312
back when IE actually wasn't a bad browser
hell, the first releases of OSX shipped with IE as the default browser

>>59723674
It was only IE5 for Mac.

IE4 and IE5 for Windows were both complete shit.

>>59722364
It's like "Welcome home, honey :3" "No, really, you are home".

>>59718963
OSX is when it started going _right_ you nincompoop. Any operating system without protected memory is a toy, a curiosity not to be burdened with any actual work.

Nostalgia for the horrific operating systems of the 90's and early 00's is just that, nostalgia. They were shit operating systems compared to even the worst modern iteration of Windows NT or macOS.

>>59724072
>Any operating system without protected memory is a toy, a curiosity not to be burdened with any actual work.

Guess all the people who bought an Apple 2 for VisiCalc fucked up then, huh?

>>59724112
In the 80's you don't need protected memory because all you're running is one application at a time. Early versions of MacOS lacked multitasking. Even Windows before 9x, for all its faults, didn't pretend to be an actual operating system.

>>59724229
>Even Windows before 9x, for all its faults, didn't pretend to be an actual operating system
Yes they did. They used it in offices, schools, and businesses all over the world.

File: Rhapsody-screenhsot.png (77KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 1024x768px

bummer we didn't get this instead of os9

>>59724262
Windows 3.1 was a shell for DOS. You could quit Program Manger and get a DOS prompt. All computers sold back then had to be sold with both DOS and Windows as two separate SKU's.

>>59723025
Look into who was the programmer that made it and iOS what it was that Jobs and you loved. It wasn't the rest of those, it was Scott. You may not like it, but that is reality.

Forstall was taken to Apple with Jobs because of his talent. You cannot deny this fact. He may have been an asshole, but, so was Jobs. Scott Forstall is Apple's rightful heir.

>>59721965
>Start target people who don't know how to use a computer
Do you even know history?

File: 1466489821890.jpg (49KB, 394x389px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 394x389px

>>59721965
>Start target people who don't know how to use a computer.
>Start

>>59721520
Any freezing and bugs were the result of crappily written apps, not the OS itself.

>>59724445
And what's your point? It was used in real workplaces to get real work done. Take your arbitrary autistic distinction and shove it.

>>59722364
>those icons
Damn, they are really fucking nice. I wish there was a theme like that for lincucks or even a professional theme.

They're all just ugly, curvy, flat shit.

File: win95.png (20KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 640x480px

Goddammit the 90s were so fucking perfect for computer UI's.

Modern UI's are just fucking shit.

>>59719991
Package management is still hot garbage compared to any halfway decent linux distro. The real power of a unix-like system is the ease at which you can expand its capabilities.

How to emulate Mac OS 9.2 on Windows?

I've always wanted one of those iMacs when I was a kid, sadly I had to make do with a shitty Compaq

File: sorry-sweetie.jpg (47KB, 501x500px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 501x500px

>>59726608
>Navigating through tree hell is better than just typing in the command you want

Sorry sweetie, but you're just blinded by the nostalgia of grey and turquoise.

File: nice.jpg (18KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 480x360px

>>59725911
Mostly extensions (the ones that came with the OS) crapped and they took your session with it or just turned some part of the OS unusuable and you had to restart. There were a couple of tricks to reload or unload those but still, buggy as hell and really irritating when you were just working and just died. Almost as stupid and annoying as the first release of Win98.

File: ss1.jpg (126KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1024x768px

>>59725911
It is the job of an operating system to prevent buggy programs from taking down the entire operating system. Any operating system that lacks basic primitives for accomplishing this is defective.

>>59724262
>>59725932
Obviously people got work done with the shitty wannabe operating systems. My point was that they were still sorry excuses for operating systems, and any nostalgia you have for them is misplaced precisely because they were shit.

Now if you want to have fond memories of stuff like NT4 and early Linux distributions like Red Hat, now we're fuckin' talking.

>>59726796
> What is Win+R

>>59723423
that must have been after netscape was kill then.

File: 71f.png (153KB, 500x377px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 500x377px

>>59726608
>Goddammit the 90s were so fucking perfect for computer UI's.
>His screenshot has a wizard, the quintessential 90's poster-child of awful UX design.

>Modern UI's are just fucking shit.
They might have looked aesthetically pleasing by some standards, but have you fucking _used_ those interfaces recently? CPU driven windowing-systems like GDI are a fucking trash-fire. Try dragging a window around under load or when the process is in the middle of crashing so you can see the graphical corruption for yourself.

Modern User Interfaces are driven by the GPU as fast as your monitor can refresh, smooth as silk, they never lag, and any corruption of the window surface is limited to the window itself and doesn't leave black shit or copies of itself on your desktop.

>>59718963
right there and every version prior

>>59726608
>Goddammit the 90s were so fucking perfect for computer UI's.
said nobody in the 90s

>>59726608
17 year old detected

The snikt sound of double clicking a window to roll it up into just the title bar... ultimate comfy.

>>59718963
they started merging with the iPhone and all their shitty web services. 10.6.8 was the last good version

>>59728338
>smooth as silk, they never lag, and any corruption of the window surface is limited to the window itself
You sound like the Patrick Bateman of UI reviewers

File: 2017-04-03-23-12-24.png (12KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 640x480px

>>59726608
Go ahead and say that to my face

File: 0526_DLDe5gG150x150.png (10KB, 150x150px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 150x150px

>>59728599

>>59728599
He really should have settled with 8bit colors. That was the true apex.

File: win98start.png (21KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 640x480px

>>59728571
Because we're living in the fucking future and all you idiots care about is muh grey and teal pixels, forgetting all the crap that came with it. And it was crap. This isn't like one of your Nintendo games, that you can pop in and have fun 30 years later. We've made real progress.

Oh by the way, yes, that is a picture of advertisements that were bundled with Windows 98.

If anything, I suspect that most of the posters in this thread never actually had to use any of these old interfaces in anger because they either weren't born or weren't into computers at the time, in which case what the *fuck* are you doing on these boards. Out OUT OUT!!!

>>59728957
TempleOS doesn't use 640x480 16 colors anymore? The fuck?

>>59729054
Yes it still does. 8 bit colors would be 256.

>>59729027
This, nostalgia aside, Windows 95/98 were buggy pieces of shit that would seemingly crash for no reason. It's nice to have for going back to play that era of PC games with a more authentic feel, but not much reason to go back otherwise. That being said, I liked how much more customizable the theme was without installing sketchy 3rd party software.

>>59727876
>It is the job of a MODERN operating system to prevent buggy programs from taking down the entire operating system.
Mac OS classic had its start on a machine with 128K of RAM and 64K of ROM. They had a budget to meet. The Lisa had PMT and PM and was an expensive failure as a result.

>>59729027
>If anything, I suspect that most of the posters in this thread never actually had to use any of these old interfaces in anger because they either weren't born or weren't into computers at the time, in which case what the *fuck* are you doing on these boards. Out OUT OUT!!!

>what the *fuck* are you doing on these boards
Kids born before '98 are 20 years old. Kids born in '99 are 18, and meet the requirements to post on this chink imageboard.

Also, pretty sure most of the posters in this thread are talking about the A E S T H E T I C of classic UIs. The crap that came with those interfaces had more to do with shoddy programming, rather than the design of the interface itself.

>>59719524
It can't. But hey, even the video aceleration is more saner in classic mac than Linux.
And classic Mac isn't sane.

>>59719857
What are you talking about? Apple literally was doing Cairo, but in extreme retarded levels.

>>59731881
Go to bed Bill

>>59731892
You know it's true Linus.
Don't worry. Perhaps the Pajeets at Nvidia could solve this.

>>59731940
No seriously: Video acceleration in Linux still is a bit messier. The most culprit is X.org as usual, but KMS has some blame too.

File: 1489464753478.jpg (7KB, 260x193px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 260x193px

>>59732069
Why are you replying to yourself?

>>59732080
Because I tought that bit after. Really one of my biggest desires is that video acceleration in Linux gets right for good.
I asume that video acceleration is "right" in classic mac Os, but that shit was literally worse than GNU code.

>>59732099
K

>>59731881
Praise AMDGPU + Wayland + Vulkan

>>59728338
>yea but mah compositing
ok? you know compositing has no effect on the look of a UI, right?
as in, if that win95 screenshot had compositing, it would not look any different whatsoever

>>59731259
Your argument doesn't work. If old MacOS was only used in the 80s and early 90s, you would have a point, but as far as I know it was used well into the 90s, on systems with much more than 128K RAM

>>59729027
while the OS's behind them were certainly not perfect, the UIs themselves were excellent.
- consistent design
- nice pixel art icons, which represent what they relate to
- mute, non-distracting colours
- '3D' design making it clear what things are, where they are, and what they do
- plenty of thought put into usability, should read up on how they made their decisions with win95, they actually tested it! with real users! (microsoft!)
i used 95/98 from 1996 - 2004, and a bit longer including working on other peoples' machines, plenty of experience with them

>>59718963
UNIX