>2017 >Not using Chicago95 What's your excuse?

So it's copying the most shittiest features introduced in NT6.0: the non-rezisable and not expanding start menu.
NT5.1 start menu was objectively improvement, but they botched it. Why?

>Total conversion
>xfce
So It's a *kit and gtk-bound piece of crap?
Why the fuck would anyone take this over lean and mean icewm+some file manager?

>>59770649
Because IceWM looks and feels like shit in comparison

>>59770649
Nostalgia.

>>59770586
>not using a classic linux window manager instead of fake win95 shit

>>59770691
How? If it's the lack 'official' MS icons and such, that is easily redeemable. All font rendering options work just as well on it as any gtk or qt software.
And it runs on potato, unlike anything using full gimp toolkit (plus the *kits, dbus and it probably depends on udev too and will shit itself with static /dev or some other device node manager).

is there a gnome version of this

>>59770586
I prefer MATE, which is old school without pretending to be something else. You can make it look at lot like Windows, though.

>>59770776
>Using Gnome
Why

>>59770743
Because Chicago95 is just a theme for XFCE and XFCE acts very differently from IceWM

>>59770586
>What's your excuse?
I don't have as much free time as you.

>>59770586
I actually am looking at using Chicago95 when I install Xubuntu. Is it pretty nice?

>>59770586
Not as good as the original. That screenshot is literally all it is.

Seems after all these years no one can be bothered to go all the way.

>>59771011
He says, while shitposting on 4chan

>>59770801
it just works. I may try xfce soon

>>59771295
>xfeces
>not even once