this post was submitted on 02 May 2024
497 points (93.7% liked)

Nostalgia

1215 readers
146 users here now

nostalgia noun nos·tal·gia nä-ˈstal-jə nə-, also nȯ-, nō-; nə-ˈstäl- 1: a wistful or excessively sentimental yearning for return to or of some past period or irrecoverable condition also : something that evokes nostalgia

Rules for Nostalgia Lemmy Community

1. Respectful Nostalgia Share nostalgic content and memories respectfully. Avoid offensive or insensitive references that may be hurtful to others.

2. Relevant Nostalgia Posts should focus on nostalgic content, including memories, media, and cultural references from the past. Stay on topic to preserve the nostalgic theme of the community.

3. Source Verification If you share nostalgic media or content, provide accurate sources or background information when possible.

4. No Spamming Avoid excessive posting of similar nostalgic topics to keep content diverse and engaging for all members.

5. Positive Discussions Encourage positive discussions and interactions related to nostalgic topics. Respect different viewpoints and memories shared by community members.

6. Quality Content Strive to post high-quality content that sparks nostalgia and meaningful conversations among members.

7. Moderation Guidelines

By adhering to these rules and guidelines, we can create a welcoming and enjoyable space to relive nostalgic moments together. If you have any questions or suggestions, feel free to reach out to the moderators. Thank you for sharing your nostalgia responsibly!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/2823044

This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/nostalgia by /u/Character-Emotion237 on 2024-05-02 22:39:26.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 80 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Yep. It feels weird to be nostalgic for windows 7, but it was honestly not bad. I think the reason why the loss of aero glass feels cold and sterile is because it honestly is. The whole metro/material design thing is just garbage. I don't want buttons that look like abstract squares, I want buttons that look like buttons. What brain-dead designer honestly likes minimal design over skeumorphism?

[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

I'm no designer (although I might be brain-dead), but I prefer minimalist UI over skeumorphism.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Eh, I was being hyperbolic when I probably shouldn't have been. It just feels very lifeless to me. I understand the arguments for it, it just feels soulless and lifeless.

[–] Anticorp 11 points 1 month ago

It's perfect to reflect the soulless company from wence it spawned.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

But also win 7 had little to do with skeumorphism

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Perhaps could be considered "frosted glass?"

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Frutiger Aero is commonly used to describe it

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

From what I've read, Frutiger Aero is considered to be a form of skeumorphism, or at least skeumorphic-adjacent.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They were trying to unify their desktop and tablet UIs (touch-driven) which itself was fucking stupid since people interact with them totally differently.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

I remember having a Wacom usb tablet at the time, and Windows kept slapping a virtual keyboard in the middle of my screen. It was infuriating, to say the least.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Especially at the time, and even somewhat still today, it saves bandwidth on virtual connections. Some places run thousands of virtual desktops for their users.

I liked Aero better, too

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ForgotAboutDre 7 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Skeumorphims is much harder to implement for varying screen sizes and resolutions. When windows 7 was first released the different screen resolutions and sizes was very limited.

I remember Windows was difficult to use if you dual booted it on a retina MacBook. Because it couldn't handle the high pixel density well, many applications couldn't be scaled properly.

Skeumorphism is also much less useful. People needed hints to help them understand what things did on their computer. Many people had limited interactions with computers, now almost everyone uses computers of some form daily (largely smartphones). The remaining skeumorphism can hinder them not help, they have no idea what a floppy disk is or why that would be a save symbol.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

Not related to your point, but I would argue that computer usage is actually down today compared to when 7 was released, as computer literacy is proving to be more of an issue for generations younger than Millenials entering the workforce compared to generations older than Millenials. And that's because smartphones work differently from laptops and desktops. The UI and how you interact with your phone is fundamentally different enough to make the skills not interchangeable. I worked with kids in their first jobs for a number of years, and many didn't have a computer in their house because they did everything from their phones.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Skeumorphims is much harder to implement for varying screen sizes and resolutions. When windows 7 was first released the different screen resolutions and sizes was very limited.

Skeumorphism can scale, it'd just require procedural generation of assets. Granted, that can be pretty hardware intensive, but you could bake the assets for common screen sizes and include the procedural versions for future resolutions. Then again, you'd probably get people complaining about how their computer is slow for a minute or two after plugging it into a new display (because it's baking new UI assets for the monitor's resolution).

Hmmm...

Skeumorphism is also much less useful. People needed hints to help them understand what things did on their computer. Many people had limited interactions with computers, now almost everyone uses computers of some form daily (largely smartphones). The remaining skeumorphism can hinder them not help, they have no idea what a floppy disk is or why that would be a save symbol.

Yeah, but it's kinda the designer's role to find new ways of visually explaining things to people while updating existing design language to account for changes in technology, culture, etc. If a floppy disk is so outdated that it confuses people when it's used to symbolize saving files, then they need to find a new icon to symbolize that.

Also, to be clear, I'm not against buttons having text labels to go with them (e.g. if the button's function is difficult to convey in an image), I honestly just want buttons to look like buttons. I'm tired of all the abstract, minimalist design. I want things to look "real" again.

Edit: an example of where procedural asset generation is widely, commercially used is video games. Believe it or not, but most game textures nowadays are procedurally generated and then baked/rasterized before being imported into a game engine. Substance Designer and Painter (material creation and texture painting, respectively) both use procedural workflows which allows them to generate textures at practically any resolution without any additional effort. The only reason why you can't tell a game to generate 8k textures is because they're usually baked before being imported into the game engine.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Bonesince1997 38 points 1 month ago (2 children)

XP & 7 were the height! Now it's just shit.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago (2 children)

XP / 7 but reduced to look / feel as close to Windows 2000 as possible 🤤

Win2K, IMO, was peak Windows. Solid as a rock and absolutely no bullshit. It's the closest Microsoft has ever come to creating Debian.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Windows 2k was niiiiccce. I kept it on for as long as possible.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] motor_spirit 7 points 1 month ago

xp is built like Ozzy, man 💪 fuck yeah

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 month ago (6 children)

The aero interface was a really good addition, in the early days of it, it sucked because it required alpha blending which wasn't very optimized in graphics cards of the era. So even if it was supported, it ran like shit and ate performance.

I liked Vista. I can still point to examples of stuff in Windows 7 which were broken that worked perfectly fine in Vista. AFAIK, that stuff was never fixed because it was a niche item that most people didn't bother with.

I've been up, down, inside and out of all of these OSes throughout my time in IT, and I can see all the problems. The sidebar/widgets in Vista were a mistake, poorly implemented fluff that consumed too many resources for what they could realistically do. If they were a lot lighter in terms of performance demands, then they would have been fine. Beyond that 7 was basically a reskinned Windows Vista, with some "updates". You could get the same updates for Vista by the time 7 came out, and it made Vista quite reasonable.

IMO, the biggest problem Vista faced wasn't that it was bloated or slow or buggy (though it was very buggy at the beginning - again, mostly fixed with patches by the time 7 landed), it was that Vista was built for the best computers at the time, with the idea that everything would improve to the point where the best computers "today" would become the minimum standard tomorrow. They were right of course, but most people were buying the cheapest HP, Dell, Acer, etc computers they could find with Intel Celeron processors and basically no graphics hardware worth a damn.... They came shipped with Vista and it sucked because you bought a shit PC. The industry was going through a bargain basement type of phase where there were a lot of "discount" CPUs coming out. Before Celeron, you bought an Intel Pentium something or other, and they were all the same. You couldn't get a premium Pentium processor, or a discount Pentium processor.... Celeron was the first foray into what would become Intel atom, or at most the core i3. Intel was looking to expand into the budget households at a time when Microsoft put out their most demanding version of Windows. So people snapped up these Celeron shit boxes pre-installed with Vista and to nobody's surprise, it sucked.

So Microsoft cobbled together a new, somewhat less demanding UI, threw away the widgets, and released the same thing as Windows 7. By the time it hit shelves, most people had figured out (specifically OEMs) that the Celeron wasn't just a cheaper Intel CPU, it was handicapped. So the focus was turned to the core series of CPUs, and away from the hobbled Celeron line.

Look, Celeron had a place, just like Intel Atom. In consumer desktops, is not that place. Something like a point of sale, yeah, that's fine. A glorified web browser or kiosk, sure. All good. A multitasking desktop? Not so much. But OEMs put that shit in everything, and they stopped doing that pretty quickly.

I very successfully ran a core 2 duo system on Vista for a long time in my younger years. 4G of RAM, Nvidia GPU... It worked really well, and I used it for many years. It was even a laptop. I still have it, it still works, but I have more powerful systems, so it's sitting in a protective case and has been untouched for many years at this point. That system was my daily driver for pretty much the entirety of college. I also had a core 2 duo at home, but I spent most of my days on campus with my laptop.

It was excellent.

Yet, everyone praises Windows 7, despite it having features that were non-functional for its entire lifespan, which people either didn't notice, or didn't care that those things didn't work. I don't hate 7. I still think that it's UI and everything was superior over 8/8.1, and that it was a really good OS for average use. As an administrator and a power user, I'm happy on 10. I also used 8/8.1 for a while and though it was functional, it was pretty painful overall. Especially compared to 10.

Don't get me started on W11.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I agree and think the main issue with Vista, as you alluded to, was that Microsoft set the minimum specs far too low and gave companies an excuse to add the absolute minimum bargain basement components, then blame Vista for being slow.

However, if they'd increased the minimum requirements those same companies would have a fit and refuse to ship Vista at all.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

The main issue with Vista was an absolute garbage HAL and driver stack.

It was incapable of working with hardwarw that XP did out of the box. Even if you managed to find a working driver it would likely crash once a day.

Also the active desktop that would always crash leaving you with an IE error page for a wallpaper.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

I get what you mean. I used Vista from sometime around 2011-2013, and even though it was slow, I always thought it was really beautiful and still have fond memories of it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 month ago

Nope, sorry if unpopular, I don't want my buttons round and volumetric. (Classic windows theme user here) Windows 7 worked great tho

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago

W7 was the last version where I felt like a normal user could have full control. I could do updates once a week without having to worry about setting safe hours. Settings weren't duplicated and scattered across multiple locations and UI styles. As far as I remember there were very few un-uninstallable features, it was the OS and what ever the user wanted. No McAffee demo, Candy Crush, OneDrive, XBox, Spotify, etc.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Aero was peak. If I could get Windows 7 with dark mode then I'd bust

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

You can probably create a rice for kde that looks like windows 7 and with built in dark mode :)

[–] HexesofVexes 20 points 1 month ago (4 children)

DOS->95->98->98SE->XP->7->REGRETREGRETREGRET

My relationship with windows in a nutshell.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Similar story for me. 3.1 > 98 > 98SE > XP > 7 > regret.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

I ♥️ KDE

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] z00s 16 points 1 month ago

Strong agree

[–] adam_y 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I had good times with windows 7. It felt good.

But my heart was with the tonka-toy hot mess of XP and themed winamp skins.

One of the main reasons I bailed to Linux is that I got so bored of staring at 10s functional but personality-less interface (which struggled even within it's own constraints to provide a useable darkmode and a non-eye-searing bright mode).

And now I have simple, but human. It's like wearing a tailored suit rather than one off the rack, and in this drawn out analogy, I think XP was like having fun in the dress up box at the back of a charity store.

[–] Landless2029 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Winamp

Winamp!

Winamp!

It really kicks the lamas ass. ^bbaaeheheh^

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I did love Aero. And Aero Snap was legit useful and remains so. macOS for whatever reason has had trouble implementing what I would now consider an essential feature: at least a basic ability to drag to the side of your screen for some basic tiling (yes... I know later versions have a "tiling" feature, but it is as if they looked at Aero Snap and said "wow, so complicated" and purposefully made it dumb).

Also, just use Linux.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I use Rectangle on my work Mac.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Sam_Bass 13 points 1 month ago

It was definitely more fun to play with. And easier to modify to your needs.

[–] UsernameIsTooLon 11 points 1 month ago

Windows 7 was my favorite, but people forget Windows 7 wasn't good on launch either. Aero was just too intensive for the hardware it released on and 7 was a band aid for Vista.

Windows 7 is awesome on modern hardware, but it's too late now.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 month ago

Windows 7 from a usability standpoint was such cancer. But I do 100% miss the aesthetic of the time :(

Also rip the old internet / search engines

[–] TotalSonic 8 points 1 month ago

Windows 2000 was the last version I thought was on the correct path, simply for it being the last version that did not require online activation.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago

Yep, 7 was the last good version of Windows and the GUI is a big part of that.

[–] Freestylesno 7 points 1 month ago

Microsoft seems to be consistent with every other version being good. Granted they can't count... 3.1, 98, xp, 7, 10, 12...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago

It was my last Windows too. I used it until shortly before the end of Extended Support, stubbornly refusing to upgrade.

I had been running Dualboot with Ubuntu for a while, but something bricked my bootloader (I didn't bother investigating just what nor trying to fix it) and I decided the time was as good as any to take the leap and go fully Linux.

I'd love to say I never looked back, but every now and then I'm tinkering to get something to run and think of the days when the question "will it work?" was reserved for complex mod setups in Skyrim. The compatibility tools have gotten a lot better and I've gotten more experienced and confident with them and the system itself, but there are days where I miss the comfort.

Still, the newer Windows versions never appealed enough to consider going getting, and they're growing less and less appealing with each new update. I'm using Win10 at work and it has only cemented my conviction to not get it for myself.

[–] qevlarr 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm one of these people who turn off transparency effects at the earliest convenience. Everything else, fine, but don't go changing even a single pixel of a window because of what's behind it in an unrelated window. It's distracting

[–] Valmond 3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Win98 club! (Or to be fair, WinXP)

I sure do the same, I wonder what the use is having a blurred blob moving behind your window?

[–] xwolpertinger 5 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Funny considering I still remember people specifically hating on XP and 7 for looking too "toy like".

The more things change the more they stay the same.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

I just got this set up in virtualbox and am planning on using jt for things. What things I will find out later.

[–] Noodle07 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

People smack-talk Windows 8, but it brought a lot of under-the-hood improvements that are really nice to have. If it hadn't been paired with the full-screen Start menu, I think it would have been remembered much more fondly.

Hardcore Windows people do not like UI change is the message I think Microsoft needs to learn, and I say this as someone who actually really liked the Metro design language in 8. If they'd made something more like Win10, I suspect it would have gone down a little easier.

Personally, I also liked 8 & 10's Start menu. I hated the upteen-nested-folders-deep trainwreck that was the 95-to-7 era's Start menu. I liked having tiles I could easily move & manage.

load more comments
view more: next ›