THIS is what an OS should look like. None of this Windows XP hackjob crap.

[FrogDog]

The colors are nice but that's all I like about it. Look at the size of those icons!

 

[beer]

ALL YOUR ICONS ARE BELONG TO US

 

[Bignate603]

I think it looks kind of cool, i'll probably never use it though because it runs on a crapple

 

[Passions]

yummy

 

[fluxquantum]

as long as it is crash proof, then i am okay with the GUI.

 

[jhu]

geez, you guys bashing the apple interface are hopeless. mac osx has a very nice and clean user interface. it's functional eye candy. i'd love to have an interface like that if it weren't so cpu intensive (same reason i don't use enlightenment). i suppose you'd prefer the windows 3.1 days? yeah, didn't think so.

 

[SpongeBob]

Yeah that is pretty sweet looking. Too bad it dosen't run on x86:frown:

 

[SSP]

Youcan get a similar theme for windows. If you use window blinds, there is a theme based on that aqua theme. And I think enlightment also have a theme based on that (for those linux users). I can bet 50 bucks that theme will be out for whistler.

If I want to suck on a lollypop, I wouldn't buy an imac.

 

[Descartes]

Great, now the interface is the defining characteristic behind a good OS?

 

[Passions]

windows blinds chews up ur sys resources like crazzzzzzzzy.

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Hey, that's SUPER!

One word: ew.

 

[RGN]

I like.

 

[ViRGE]

Ack, come March 24th, I'm screwed.

 

[SSP]

BTW, I happen to like the win xp look over that mac crap.

 

[element]

That blue PING button looks like a pill. Where is the red pill so I can meet Trinity and the rest of the Nebuchadnezzar crew?

 

[SSP]

Funny how Mac blobs call Microsoft names then turn around and use Internet explorer,

 

[Cybrchaos]

Could they steal any more from MS?:disgust:

 

[jsm]

Aqua is actually a junky interface that still needs to catch up to Explorer in a lot of ways. It still feels like NeXT to me. I think the Finder was a better interface.. and it seems Apple is trying to get away from that feel, which is too bad.

What I really don't like about MacOS X is the fact that it is sooo slow. I have ran it on a dual 500mhz G4 and it felt like I was running OS9 on a 603.

Anyhow, the reason that OSX runs IE is because it is the only browser installed on the OS. There is another browser, but again, it is something you have to go off and download. Also, the Mac OS has been shipping with IE as the default browser for years. If you remember what Steve Jobs said when he announced that Microsoft was investing 150$ million in Apple - the war is over.

And as for stealing from people in the computer world - everyone borrows ideas from eachother. Since it took years for Microsoft to make a mouse, I want to accuse them of stealing the idea from Logitech. Hah!

 

[Czar]

I dare you all to lower your screenresolution to 1024x768 and open that image in your browser and press F11. Watch the reflection of yourself when your skin begins to sizzle and your eyes pop out.

Anyhow, it looks nice.....













... FOR ME TO POOP ON !!!

 

[Elledan]

I must say that it looks a whole lot better (cleaner) than the GUI of WinXP (Windows eXtreme Problems ). The GUI of WinXP looks the most like some child's OS

But like said before: who cares about how an OS looks? It's about stability and speed, right?

 

[Eug]

Wow, lots of responses!


<< Personally, I find the win2k interface really nice with the rainy day theme and some minor mods. night and tight. small fonts the way I like it. >>

Eh? Don't tell me you've never tweaked the font size in Windows 2000.


<< If you use window blinds, there is a theme based on that aqua theme. >>

I tried it. It's kinda buggy.


<< who cares about how an OS looks? It's about stability and speed, right? >>

Sure, I'd prefer stability over looks, but it's an important feature nonetheless. I'd be willing to give up a little bit of speed for good looks though. Plus, it's not just looks, but ease of use. If it didn't matter, we'd still all be using the command prompt.


<< ohh yeah btw, we can see your ip, there might be some malicious assholes out there. >>

Well, it's Sympatico, so the IP is dynamic. Actually, it's my friend's computer so I don't care. (I own a Celly 880. I do have a Mac, but it's too old to run OS X.)

Anyways, I haven't used it much - just played a bit. I don't like that dock too much. I still prefer my disappearing bar in Windows.

 

[element]

&quot;Actually, it's my friend's computer so I don't care.&quot;

Gee, the comraderie between you and your friend is so touching. Can I be friends with you too? I'll give you my IP addy and home address and everything. Borrow my credit cards anytime too.

Not that anyone would want to hax0r your friends Macincrap. We feel sorry enough for him having to use it as it is anyway.

 

[Charles]

I like it very much.

 

[Elledan]

<< who cares about how an OS looks? It's about stability and speed, right? >>

Sure, I'd prefer stability over looks, but it's an important feature nonetheless. I'd be willing to give up a little bit of speed for good looks though. Plus, it's not just looks, but ease of use. If it didn't matter, we'd still all be using the command prompt.>>

With an OS, there are those variables who play a big role:

1) Ease of use (This means _no_ stupid wizards for the most simple tasks if you're a bit more than the average newbie user)
2) Stability (How many seconds will the system 'live' if you open a lot of applications?)
3) Looks (does it look like some candy shop, or like a serious OS?)
4) The amount of software available (drivers, games, application software, etc.)

'looks' is thus not the same as 'ease of use'

BTW the command prompt doesn't comply with #1 and #3

 

[StealthX32]

I think OS X is great...next generation of Windoze, but 50000000x more stable than windows. It's the only good thing Apple has ever made, and that's cuz it's Unix based. I'd definitely use it if it was x86 compatible.