XP look-alike interface?

The place to bring up any design issues, or post your own creations

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply

Would you like to "keep with the times" by implementing an XP-style interface for ReactOS?

Yes
119
56%
No
92
44%
 
Total votes: 211

gnu_rocky
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:36 pm

XP look-alike interface?

Post by gnu_rocky » Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:54 pm

Yo:

Alot of people these days use Windows XP. Either because they have to or they are ignorant about Linux. I was thinking if we could get somebody to come up with a "luna" XP GUI skin for ReactOS so as to "keep with the times". I personally couldn't care less if I had such a look and feel to ReactOS. But others who are new to this revolutionary idea of a Windows wannabe might think it a great idea. :) Hopefully, we don't get a letter from Redmond requesting us to shut down or anything. Just some food for thought.

Matthew Nawrocki
gnu_rocky

counting_pine
Posts: 237
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:44 pm
Location: Fallowfield

Re: XP look-alike interface?

Post by counting_pine » Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:24 am

gnu_rocky wrote:Alot of people these days use Windows XP. Either because they have to or they are ignorant about Linux.
Or, because they prefer it to Linux.

I'd vote, if there was an "eventually" option, but I prefer the Windows 2000 look.

TiKu
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2005 9:09 pm
Location: Unterföhring, Germany
Contact:

Re: XP look-alike interface?

Post by TiKu » Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:09 am

counting_pine wrote:
gnu_rocky wrote:Alot of people these days use Windows XP. Either because they have to or they are ignorant about Linux.
Or, because they prefer it to Linux.
Hehe, I just wanted to write the same.
I like Luna, so I voted "Yes".

GreyGhost
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 12:16 pm

Post by GreyGhost » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:13 am

Eventually here to (keeping the classic look alive)
Used to the old look .. I relly am...And like half the peoplke still use the old look wins.. that will make migration easirer ... (I think... Ishouldnt think too much...) ..... :lol:

StringCheesian
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 11:37 pm

Post by StringCheesian » Wed Nov 23, 2005 11:42 pm

Themeability is good.

The Windows 9x/2000 theme may be very old looking, but it could be worse: at least it doesn't look like Windows 3.1

gnu_rocky
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:36 pm

Ha Ha

Post by gnu_rocky » Thu Nov 24, 2005 12:18 am

StringCheesian wrote:Themeability is good.

The Windows 9x/2000 theme may be very old looking, but it could be worse: at least it doesn't look like Windows 3.1
Ha Ha! Good one! I sorta agree w/ you.

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Hmm this might be flame bait

Post by oiaohm » Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:07 am

I voted no.

Reason not that I like the current form.

Reason why should we set our sites so low. If we are going to cause processor overload. Lets do it well. Go Vistia style. Fully vector based graphics. Zoomable windows... Basic the full hog and then some.

Add some of our own features to improve the system as well.

forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart » Thu Nov 24, 2005 7:12 pm

SharpE instead.

Check their forum here
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.

counting_pine
Posts: 237
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 10:44 pm
Location: Fallowfield

Post by counting_pine » Thu Nov 24, 2005 10:25 pm

Patchworks wrote:SharpE instead.

Check their forum here
Just wait until ReactOS supports SharpE, then you can download and install it yourself.

Grahamtse
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:00 pm

Post by Grahamtse » Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:10 pm

I believe it would be good to have both 2000/XP style as MS also keep 2000-like interface for old user. It stated that the 2000-like interface still having its own value. Personally, I don't have preference on what kind of interface, but it would be better to have 2000/XP style for the dummy users.

cmoibenlepro
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:44 pm
Location: Canada

Post by cmoibenlepro » Fri Nov 25, 2005 8:34 pm

SharpE sux. :evil:

Use it if you want, but I don't want it to be default... I hate it!
The default one should be the actual one, and if someone want to use anyone else he should install it himself (or use an eventual distro).

dark
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 9:40 pm

Post by dark » Sat Nov 26, 2005 3:11 am

Keep it 2000, all future windows gui's seem to be based on it, why would you make it xp like when vista is about to come around (and so on with every version after that) They're all based on the same window and startbar functions. (maximize, minimize, close, start)

gnu_rocky
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:36 pm

Post by gnu_rocky » Sat Nov 26, 2005 7:08 pm

dark wrote:Keep it 2000, all future windows gui's seem to be based on it, why would you make it xp like when vista is about to come around (and so on with every version after that) They're all based on the same window and startbar functions. (maximize, minimize, close, start)
Good point dark! I shoulda thought of that. But, let us be mindful that this OS shouldn't, "mess with success" by trying to make a bloated interface. I am more concerned with stability, features, and enough ease of use to make it worthwhile. :mrgreen: I know I sound like a hipocrite by suggesting we stick with our current GUI when I stated earlier to use a more modern "Luna" style GUI.

forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart » Mon Nov 28, 2005 11:07 am

cmoibenlepro wrote:SharpE sux. :evil:

Use it if you want, but I don't want it to be default... I hate it!
Please motivate you hate, or yours are just *personal* opinions.

Anyway i don't be strictly "roped" to SharpE.
My idea is to involve a standalone-project shell, so if you know another one, please signals it to us all.

(check my 'shell' list here)
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.

cmoibenlepro
Posts: 483
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 5:44 pm
Location: Canada

Post by cmoibenlepro » Mon Nov 28, 2005 5:40 pm

My idea is to involve a standalone-project shell, so if you know another one, please signals it to us all.
I don't have one to signal, because I don't WANT one. :wink:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest