Iyeru wrote:nitrofurano wrote:in my oppinion, betting in a fancy GUI would be the worse mistake possible - XP and Vista are nice examples of this - and as well, using MacOS-X, what is missing there were no fancy interfaces, but yes those missing simple ones, like from NeXT-Step or Rhapsody... The most simple and fast an inteface is, better it is as well...
OS9's interface was better than OSX's
Prepare for Internet Argument™... I disagree, the old MacOS interface looked dated and was not as pretty or intuitive as MacOSX.
As someone who has used the Windows classic interface since forever and refuses to change to anything else (especially the XP Start Menu or the new Explorer layout introduced with Windows Vista), I'm generally against anything that isn't Windows 2000, but I bought a Mac Mini with MacOSX 10.3 a while ago (basically a whim) and it is actually quite nice, if a little slow - which I guess should be expected from a 1.25GHz PowerPC machine with 256MB of RAM and a 32MB ATi Radeon 9x00.
My only real issues with it are that (A) Apple mice are terrible, so you need to go out and grab a normal Logitech USB mouse and also (B) the way the mouse slows down so that it appears to be moving with pixel-perfect accuracy when it's moved at a speed below a certain threshold is "well bloody annoying, mate" - I suppose that it might be good for image editing, but that is something I do not do a lot of with my somewhat underpowered Mac Mini, and it doesn't appear that I can disable it.
However, this is getting off-topic - we're supposed to be talking about the Vista look, not the OSX look.