Is it Win7 or XP Classic?

Hi there

The GIVE AWAY is the windows message centre icon

Why not go the OTHER WAY round

Here's W2K3 looking (almost) like W7 and using a piece of the Brazilian W7 regional Theme

Much better Idea IMO


Cheers
jimbo

Saw this a while ago and thought it was bad,

Code:

http://www.solidblogger.com/xp-theme-for-windows-7-free-download/

I have customised my Win7 and it looks way different to the standard, although I cannot understand anyone who a) Will not switch from XP b) Want new OS to look and act like an old one? But each to their own. As long as your happy.

ilesal said:

Want new OS to look and act like an old one?

Because the new look brings nothing to the table in terms of improved workflow and work efficiency? On the contrary for me it just wastes screen real estate, obstructs and clutters the view. After 15 years of using the old look it's much faster to get stuff done because you're all played in. Imagine some virtuoso piano player, and if you'de suddenly shuffle around the notes/keys on the keyboard, no amount of "getting used to the new 'look'" would recover the half a life time (or more) of practicing to become skilled/efficient craftsman he was.

For some people the OS is not a painting to look at, it's an actual tool in which work has to be done, not a launcher for a browser/game/movie player in which most time is spent. If I want to see fancy UI effects and animations I'll watch an episode of CSI: Miami

To each their own taste of what they think is ugly or not, where they work better or not etc. that's pefectly fine, but I really don't get the ridiculing "lollercopterz, you're a sensless moron, go back to win95" attitude that's seems to be around (in general not only this thread) to anyone who prefers classic theme (and related things) over aero.


And sticking to an old OS version is not a valid answer to those of us who work more efficiently in the classic enfironment, because among other things there are features, SW support and HW support which require upgrading.

tweaker said:

ilesal said:

Want new OS to look and act like an old one?

Because the new look brings nothing to the table in terms of improved workflow and work efficiency? On the contrary for me it just wastes screen real estate, obstructs and clutters the view. After 15 years of using the old look it's much faster to get stuff done because you're all played in. Imagine some virtuoso piano player, and if you'de suddenly shuffle around the notes/keys on the keyboard, no amount of "getting used to the new 'look'" would recover the half a life time (or more) of practicing to become skilled/efficient craftsman he was.

For some people the OS is not a painting to look at, it's an actual tool in which work has to be done, not a launcher for a browser/game/movie player in which most time is spent. If I want to see fancy UI effects and animations I'll watch an episode of CSI: Miami

To each their own taste of what they think is ugly or not, where they work better or not etc. that's pefectly fine, but I really don't get the ridiculing "lollercopterz, you're a sensless moron, go back to win95" attitude that's seems to be around (in general not only this thread) to anyone who prefers classic theme (and related things) over aero.


And sticking to an old OS version is not a valid answer to those of us who work more efficiently in the classic enfironment, because among other things there are features, SW support and HW support which require upgrading.

A virtuoso piano player would have no problem playing on either a 100 year old piano or the latest and greatest keyboard. Your comparison between an OS and a piano is weak--sorry. A "virtuoso" should be able to adapt to new conditions, in any event.

dave1812 said:

A virtuoso piano player would have no problem playing on either a 100 year old piano or the latest and greatest keyboard. Your comparison between an OS and a piano is weak--sorry. A "virtuoso" should be able to adapt to new conditions, in any event.

Correct me if I'm wrong, the key layout is identical on all regular pianos/keyboards, whether it be 1 or 100 years old. I doubt very much he would be able to play equally skilled if the keys suddenly were ordered GFEHCAD instead CDEFGAH, or whatever. Not without signifficant time investement, time better spent on actually performing because the music coming out in the end is what matters not how the piano looks.

It was just a quick random analogy in any case, I'm no gonig to spend lots of time coming up with a super fantastic one, because I could get work done instead

There's still no justification of looking down and (border line) insulting people based on what UI configuration works best for them.

tweaker said:

dave1812 said:

A virtuoso piano player would have no problem playing on either a 100 year old piano or the latest and greatest keyboard. Your comparison between an OS and a piano is weak--sorry. A "virtuoso" should be able to adapt to new conditions, in any event.

Correct me if I'm wrong, the key layout is identical on all regular pianos/keyboards, whether it be 1 or 100 years old. I doubt very much he would be able to play equally skilled if the keys suddenly were ordered GFEHCAD instead CDEFGAH, or whatever. Not without signifficant time investement, time better spent on actually performing because the music coming out in the end is what matters not how the piano looks.

It was just a quick random analogy in any case, I'm no gonig to spend lots of time coming up with a super fantastic one, because I could get work done instead

There's still no justification of looking down and (border line) insulting people based on what UI configuration works best for them.

Who has insulted anyone?? LOL!

In any event, it's hardly equivalent to rocket science, to switch from XP to Vista or 7. Let's not make it out to be that only Mensa members can manage the switch over, huh??

I didn't say you or everybody did, I've just seen enough posts (outside of this thread aswell) which are unecessary. I'm not talking about "man that's ugly" type of thing, that's fine.

Never claimed it to be rocket science, not sure how you got that from it. What I said was that for some people it's just more productive to use classic themed/tweaked things over aero (and whatnot), with a little colorful elaboration added. There's nothing debatable about that, as only that person knows what works best for them, nor is it something to look down on. With that i'll bow out of this thread again.

tweaker said:

ilesal said:

Want new OS to look and act like an old one?

Because the new look brings nothing to the table in terms of improved workflow and work efficiency? On the contrary for me it just wastes screen real estate, obstructs and clutters the view. After 15 years of using the old look it's much faster to get stuff done because you're all played in. Imagine some virtuoso piano player, and if you'de suddenly shuffle around the notes/keys on the keyboard, no amount of "getting used to the new 'look'" would recover the half a life time (or more) of practicing to become skilled/efficient craftsman he was.

For some people the OS is not a painting to look at, it's an actual tool in which work has to be done, not a launcher for a browser/game/movie player in which most time is spent. If I want to see fancy UI effects and animations I'll watch an episode of CSI: Miami

To each their own taste of what they think is ugly or not, where they work better or not etc. that's pefectly fine, but I really don't get the ridiculing "lollercopterz, you're a sensless moron, go back to win95" attitude that's seems to be around (in general not only this thread) to anyone who prefers classic theme (and related things) over aero.


And sticking to an old OS version is not a valid answer to those of us who work more efficiently in the classic enfironment, because among other things there are features, SW support and HW support which require upgrading.

Where is a BS emoticon when you need one.....

BS emoticon

I second that and refer back to my previous post.