Strange thing is, that I still use Windows 7 + NOD32 in my main computer, and I even visit some "suspicious" sites and get tons of virus notifications, but nothing has not come thru. So I do not understand the panic, that Windows 7 is totally unsafe.

Because Windows 7 is still maintained and will be up to year 2023 through payed support (more or less tied to Windows 8.1 end of support). Chromium based browser postponed end of support until January 2022 and more likely will postpone even further, due to global economic recession.

And with recent news about strict hardware requirements for Windows 11 release version, Windows 10 most likely will be hanging around much longer than planned end of support in 2025. Just like XP and 7 did.

Those "suspicious" sites even have those Windows 7 updates....

Just watched Michael MJD's new video: ULTRA RARE Windows XP 20th Anniversary Edition! - Unboxing & Exploration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDaPCZ9Ml9g

It was released in 2005 to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Windows, not Windows XP, but it showed how much efforts had Microsoft put on it.

I don't have huge attachment to any particular GUI. I mean, they're just a GUI: a child-simple menu-y thing to click at a few times while you load an application.

They may be fancy graphical fireworks shows these days, comparatively speaking, but ultimately they've changed very little in 30 years. They're still just simple menu-y things to click at while you load your apps.

In 500 years, history won't care about the puny differences between late 20th/early 21st century iterations. They'll just go "During this era, there were GUIs, which were ways to visually select computer operations".

Well, yes and no. GUIs are interfaces.

And that's what most people without disorders do react very sensitive to.

A sad or angry face causes them a different feeling than a happy or sleepy one.

So it's not completely irrelevant. People are still people, after all.
Some faces even cause anxiety and uneasiness.

Considering that people are forced to work with GUIs each day, for many hours, makes them a part of their lives.

Let's imagine having an ugly painting hanging in the living room or at work for years.
Who wouldn't would like to get rod of it, if possible? 😉

Beta Archive Guy uploaded the theme to archive.org. I think a theme is alright to share here.

Besides a wallpaper, a custom screensaver that requires Flash of all things to run, which I do not have flash installed, there is a small change to the default mouse pointers. It is the normal Luna theme. Since I don't have speakers on the rig I tested it on it was 2003 server x64 which theme works on also of course. So I don't know if there are any sound changes to report. All in All it is a very minor tweak to the default luna theme, so if you were expecting something major like Zune theme its not that. Oh the icons for mydocs, computer, recycle, network are changed to 20th party icons.

https://ia601403.us.archive.org/view_archive. … ANNIVERSARY.ISO

Jo22 wrote on 2021-08-26, 19:55:

Well, yes and no. GUIs are interfaces. […]
Show full quote

Well, yes and no. GUIs are interfaces.

And that's what most people without disorders do react very sensitive to.

A sad or angry face causes them a different feeling than a happy or sleepy one.

So it's not completely irrelevant. People are still people, after all.
Some faces even cause anxiety and uneasiness.

Considering that people are forced to work with GUIs each day, for many hours, makes them a part of their lives.

Let's imagine having an ugly painting hanging in the living room or at work for years.
Who wouldn't would like to get rod of it, if possible? 😉

A DOS prompt is an interface too, and I can't say that looking at it ever made me feel sad. But I am not blind to your points. Whether I like it or not, the world is full of people for whom the window dressing is quite important, and they are welcome to it.

Windows 7 for me is still just a standin for XP. I use it on newer computers because modern software forces me to, not because I prefer it. It's the last acceptable version of Windows for me. If I ever build a new PC where Win7 is no longer usable, I expect it will run linux primarily and have Win10 for gaming only.
Historically I generally haven't liked the linux desktop experience either, but there's a huge difference in how much control you have with linux. There's multiple competing GUIs to pick from, and with enough effort, you can still claim ownership over any aspect of your computer with linux, unlike modern Windows which gives the keys to Microsoft and puts you in the back seat.

I never used the "themes" in XP, I turn that off and reconfigure a few other checkbox options and then XP feels almost the same as Win2k. While I used to prefer Win2k, in the end WinXP ended up being more useful because a lot of software dropped Win2k support long before XP. WinXP still has a larger memory footprint and maybe runs slower on something like a Pentium 3, but that difference stopped being significant on anything much newer.

I still find the control panel in Win7 difficult to navigate and it's hard to find things I can find easily in XP. Some useful functions are hidden and you have to find the path to some secret executable to make them appear.
Win7's default taskbar is awful IMO, it kind of blows my mind what they did with it and that apparently some people liked it. Anyway at least it's possible to fix it. Icon grouping can be turned off, and I eventually found a tutorial explaining all the steps you have to follow to recreate the quick launch bar. Not exactly user friendly but it can be done.

On my current everyday PC, I now run Linux Mint primarily. The biggest weakness with it is that it's 3D game performance sucks.

Same here. Newer Windows only for gaming, and that in a virtualised way. Bare metal Windows days for me are over, I'll be the macOS/Linux guy.

Jo22 wrote on 2021-08-26, 19:55:

Well, yes and no. GUIs are interfaces.

Irreverent dribble snipped.

GUIs are GRAPHICAL user interfaces and a means to an end. You don't NEED them to operate a computer if you choose the right operating system. Nor doyou need a GUI to run a graphical program. NeoPaint in Dos for instance.

Shreddoc wrote on 2021-08-26, 04:26:

I don't have huge attachment to any particular GUI. I mean, they're just a GUI: a child-simple menu-y thing to click at a few times while you load an application.

They may be fancy graphical fireworks shows these days, comparatively speaking, but ultimately they've changed very little in 30 years. They're still just simple menu-y things to click at while you load your apps.

In 500 years, history won't care about the puny differences between late 20th/early 21st century iterations. They'll just go "During this era, there were GUIs, which were ways to visually select computer operations".

XP is more then a GUI though. Unlike the early versions of windows it is an actual OS controling your hardware.
This is the main reason I still use XP alot. Yeh the GUI is nostalgic but more important is that XP natively supports EAX/Direct sound and has the least compatibility issues networking with my older rigs, games, etc.

I agree though even in 50 years GUI will be an era, just as anyone that's not into computers already sees anything pre GUI as the command line era often even caring even if its a 8bit or 16bit based computer

chinny22 wrote on 2021-08-27, 10:42:

XP is more then a GUI though. Unlike the early versions of windows it is an actual OS controling your hardware.

That's something true since Windows XP it is the first NT-based operating system that most consumers experienced unlike the earlier 9x-based ones which ran on top on a MS-DOS variant.

The only things that were lost are the compatibility with programs that relies on VXD tricks and the good DOS support in exchange for better stability.

chinny22 wrote on 2021-08-27, 10:42:

XP is more then a GUI though. Unlike the early versions of windows it is an actual OS controling your hardware. This is the main […]
Show full quote

Shreddoc wrote on 2021-08-26, 04:26:

I don't have huge attachment to any particular GUI. I mean, they're just a GUI: a child-simple menu-y thing to click at a few times while you load an application.

They may be fancy graphical fireworks shows these days, comparatively speaking, but ultimately they've changed very little in 30 years. They're still just simple menu-y things to click at while you load your apps.

In 500 years, history won't care about the puny differences between late 20th/early 21st century iterations. They'll just go "During this era, there were GUIs, which were ways to visually select computer operations".

XP is more then a GUI though. Unlike the early versions of windows it is an actual OS controling your hardware.
This is the main reason I still use XP alot. Yeh the GUI is nostalgic but more important is that XP natively supports EAX/Direct sound and has the least compatibility issues networking with my older rigs, games, etc.

I agree though even in 50 years GUI will be an era, just as anyone that's not into computers already sees anything pre GUI as the command line era often even caring even if its a 8bit or 16bit based computer

Kids writing history reports on 20th Century will be all...

"In between shootouts with thompson machine guns over distribution rights for intoxicants, 20th century people could spend their leisure time using a window computer, this emulated a window on which things were drawn, much like cave paintings. This was operated by a device called a mouse, made out of an early form of polymer such as bakelite. These machines could be made as small as a piece of luggage, allowing the user to take them out to an outside event, like a train wreck, charleston marathon or rock concert, which they would drive to in a personal conveyance such as a corvette or model T"

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-08-27, 01:43:

Nor do you need a GUI to run a graphical program. NeoPaint in Dos for instance.

You mean, you don't need an OS GUI to run a program that has its own GUI. 😀 It's true. However, when you have many such programs, it is way nicer to have the OS implement a consistent set of GUI functions and libraries, rather than every developer rolling their own.

dr_st wrote on 2021-08-27, 14:35:

You mean, you don't need an OS GUI to run a program that has its own GUI. 😀 It's true.

Most if not all DOS programs that implements GUI doesn't use any kind of acceleration due to lack of proper standardization there on consumer hardware. There's VBE/AF but that one wasn't widely adopted due to royalty payment.

I remember stuff that had bare bones 640x480 generic VGA modes, but 800x600 or 1024x768 were supported for specific chipsets only, like Cirrus Logic or S3, that suggests to me that they used accelerated features. Mostly these would have been image editors and photo viewers etc.

BitWrangler wrote on 2021-08-27, 15:08:

I remember stuff that had bare bones 640x480 generic VGA modes, but 800x600 or 1024x768 were supported for specific chipsets only, like Cirrus Logic or S3, that suggests to me that they used accelerated features. Mostly these would have been image editors and photo viewers etc.

Yep, non-standard video modes there and depends if the software developer cared enough to support this.

Didn't love XP back then and don't love it now. Or any other OS, really. I run whatever other software requires to perform optimally.

I only kept XP around to test game patches on that I used to do.

Gmlb256 wrote on 2021-08-27, 15:01:

dr_st wrote on 2021-08-27, 14:35:

You mean, you don't need an OS GUI to run a program that has its own GUI. 😀 It's true.

Most if not all DOS programs that implements GUI doesn't use any kind of acceleration due to lack of proper standardization there on consumer hardware. There's VBE/AF but that one wasn't widely adopted due to royalty payment.

I second this.

Their "acceleration" rather consists of not using the proper DOS+BIOS+VGA BIOS ABI/API calls,
but developers "optimizing" their programs through bare metal programming. 😉

Unfortunately, that's one of the reasons the DOS world never adopted any kind of graphics acceleration.
If an API/ABI was used, acceleration could have been brought in "behind the back" .

In a similar way, Windows programs from the 1980s did profit from the Windows Accelerators of the 1990s.
Once run on Windows 3.x, old programs using GDI became accelerated without even knowing.