Windowzzzzzzz....

Martin · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 12:22 am

It has become generally accepted that, as far as an opperating system goes, windows is the only way to do it. That's not to say that Mac's and Linux are useless, it's just that all three of those opperating systems have the same basic user interface behind them: Windows. It has gotten to the point where many people cannot even imagine a different, and possibly better way of doing things. Now, I must admit that the windows layout is quite good, and I'm sure that the boyz down at Micro$oft are busy trying to think up ways to improve it, but what do you think a different way could be? Not necessarily better, or worse, just different. And, with your new method, what does it have that Windows lacks, and vice versa.

Think outside the box. Or just remember, there is no box Wink

Tony · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 8:30 am

perhaps the user inferface could be changed, but not as much as you think. If I was to have a 3D interface, I might as well have a railgun alone with it.

Shoot files you want to open Laughing

PaddyLong · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:59 am

you're just talking about the shell right? because there's lots of alternative shells out there that you can get for windows.

rizzix · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:23 pm

lol darkness why give m$ all the credit.. m$ is never innovative.. they just copy of the best (and worst) from everyone..

GUI was a project at zerox labs (i think zerox, not sure). anyhow the first GUI project was pretty much just a research subject. But steve jobs took that project and created a GUI OS for commercial use. There was another one being popularized at the same time.. it was called icon (it got it's idea from the same lab!) or something. anyhow.. the Apple I and Apple II got really popular, specially in universities and other educational institutes. thus it took off. The came in the macintosh with 100s - 1000s of improvements..

In the mean while m$ had created DOS as a highly simplified, easy to use OS. but it only had a CUI to it.
So looking at the way the macs took off they decided to add some GUI to it. They then created a GUI shell over the DOS OS and called it Windows 3.1. This version of windows was such a rip-off the mac GUI (omg as i said they were and are NEVER INNOVATIVE). But it was sold at a remarkable cheap rate.. and the most important point is that it worked on cheaper IBM-compatibles. Since the offer was too good to be true (mac were expensive those days) it really took off.

Now they are as usual always behind apple in terms of Human Interface Guidelines. They never seem to have mastered the art and skill and intellect of creating a perfect GUI..

But the funny thing since it has got so popular.. many people.. (just like you [no offense]) have no idea how foolishly they blindly believe that m$ did it all.

Now have u ever tried Mac OS X? I don't think so.
Try it. It is the most advance GUI, OS you'll ever touch.

It is freakin easy to use (as usual) but hell more. There are some concepts you'll see there that are just mind boggling.

BTW: Mac OS 9 was terrible.. this is the X (10).. i'm waiting for panther!

LovelyCrap · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 5:08 pm

I agree with rizzix.

Mac OS is far superior in many ways when compared to windows. When was the last time you heard of a Mac crashing? Thats not to say that they don't crash (and when they do it's pretty spectacular... kinda like dropping a nuke...), they just do it far less often than Windows (esp 9X).

Unfortunately due to the nature of Mac OS and the way Apple implements their computers, PC's are still better than Macs (for most users). For now at least, you have to buy a Mac in order to use Mac OS. This wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that Macs are ridiculously underpowered compared to most PC's in a comparable price range, and upgrading a Mac offers limited options. This may soon change because Apple has finally decided to develop a OS compatible with PC's.

Back to the whole interface thing. A 3D interface would be totally unnecessary, not to mention quite clunky. Plus, the average household computer won't be able to run such a 3D application/OS with a decent frame rate. What would you do with a 3D OS environment anyway? Adding a Z-axis would make navigation so much more difficult than a simple 2D interface.

Just my 2 cents.

Homer_simpson · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 5:16 pm

well a 2d one would look more pro... but as long as it doesn't slow down so much and doesn't take up so much memory 3d would be nice...

Tony · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 5:20 pm

but honestly, what would you do with a 3D interface? Scater your files around de_dust map and use AK to fight off virus infected files?

A well designed 2D interfect would be way better.

AsianSensation · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 7:34 pm

I agree with Tony, a 2D interface is better than a 3D interface, think of the real world example, A real library versus an online library, it's way easier to get the resources online than to search shelf by shelf for a book in the real library. The fact that public libraries uses computers to help people find stuff just proves my point.

Dan · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 9:56 pm

well i think that if you had some realy cool video out put device like VR or some how sending the info right to your brian that a 3d GUI system whould be far better. but with a output device that can only turtly out put on a 2d surface you pirtty much need to have it 2d or you will just be casuing trouble b/c you will have to be chaging the view all the time and it whould just be a pain in the ass.

i whould say that as soon as a 3d output deivce is made well then a 3d os whould be the best by far. till then 2d is realy the only way.

Martin · **Posted:** Fri Oct 24, 2003 11:50 pm

Windows Longhorn is supposed to have DirectX support for 3d graphics of some sort, although I think it'll just be to make icons/buttons look a lot nicer.

LovelyCrap · **Posted:** Sat Oct 25, 2003 1:42 am

Darkness wrote:

Windows Longhorn is supposed to have DirectX support for 3d graphics of some sort, although I think it'll just be to make icons/buttons look a lot nicer.

Longhorn's interface will not be 3D. You are correct in assuming it's only for icons/buttons and crap like that.

rizzix · **Posted:** Sat Oct 25, 2003 10:25 am

it is probably something like Panther, the whole os is rendered using OpenGL (and the amazing QuartzExtreme).. in LongHorn's case DirectX

It is still 2D with a minor, really micro z-axis for a bit of a realistic 3d effect. It look better that way.

BTW: Panther is released! 150 new features! Check out this little video

rizzix · **Posted:** Sat Oct 25, 2003 10:35 am

speaking of which there is one thing m$ invented that is cool and i will admit apple did borrow the idea. Fast User Switching!

(apple admitted it them selves as well)

Martin · **Posted:** Sat Oct 25, 2003 6:28 pm

Panther looks awesome...if they would let me right click, I'd buy a mac for university Razz

rizzix · **Posted:** Sat Oct 25, 2003 6:37 pm

c'mon man... everyone says that.. just buy a 2-button mouse.. both buttons will work!!

in a one button mouse, the equivalent of a right click is control+click.

just buy a 2 button!

	Computer Science Canada Programming C, C++, Java, PHP, Ruby, Turing, VB Username: Password: Register
Wiki Blog Search Turing Chat Room Members