I used to start with 2000 server (so I could RDP) and then install something like Aston Shell to make it customizable and beautiful.

I miss the days when windows was a platform you could extend and customize.

For me, search integrated into the start menu was a major quality of life improvement. Particularly the ability to hit the Windows key and type the name of an application. Strictly speaking, this was introduced in Vista, but I feel like Windows 7 added a lot of useful polish to the Windows Vista style of UI.

I otherwise agree that the older Win 2k era UI was pretty much an ideal UI. The whole "frutiger aero" look did not age well.

I've lived through every evolution of Windows from 3.1 up to 11 and Millenium/2000 still remains my favourite and I will always consider it the most 'get-shit-done' UI that Microsoft has ever built. Up until W10 removed the feature, I used to turn off the Themes service so that I could get the classic UI back.

And I also completely agree with your point that everything else since then has felt like a poorly placed theme on top of something else.

Out of curiosity, are there any good comparisons in-detail between Windows 2000 and present-day Linux?

I do have the same feeling that Windows 2000 was in many regards the best UI (tied with 7 maybe), but after switching to Linux I'm wondering if this is maybe more rose-colored glasses than I thought.

KDE or XFCE seem to mimic the Windows 2000 design in many ways, but they are still far away from feeling as snappy or as well-thought out than Windows 2000 did. They also paradoxically feel more "gray" than I remember Windows, even though the "grayness" of Windows from that era is sort of famous.

So I'd like to know if this is really just nostalgia/muscle memory or if there are really specific things that KDE does worse than Windows did.

Agree, that 2000/Millennium aesthetic was absolutely peak design and usability.

Looks like this mod supports the "classic" theme too.

That was the thing I missed most in Windows 10. With the previous versions of Windows (I think up to 7?) you could still switch back to classic theme.

Same here, Windows 2000 is peak UI, I never liked the Frutiger Aero aesthetics. My only criticism is that it was, in a sense, too successful and elements like the taskbar and start menu got ossified and the design stagnated. Apple's F3 show all windows, F4 spotlight is far better. Windows didn't even get multiple desktops until Windows 10.

I guess I like the design language but I wouldn't be prepared to give back the usability of modern UIs.

Nah, its not rose tinted glasses. Win2000/Win2003 were amazing. I still run Win2003 because it just workz. GUI is great, it snappy, I have all the tools to tinker here and there.. Leaked SRC code helps tiny bit ;)

Win7 wasnt that bad, you still could set classic GUI. If they only kept it like this and plow money to improve kernel...

Booting win2k with under 10 processes running at startup and ~50MB RAM consumed was glorious. Updated Warp on a child's computer last evening and 7GB consumed at boot with W11 reminded me of win2k days and how much they are missed...

Yes for me too. Windows 2000 was clean and efficient. With not too much bling.

Yeah I agree too. I never understood the love for the win7 aesthetic!

7 was the peak though cus it actually worked flawlessly.. In my experience earlier versions of windows were kinda janky and unstable.

[dead]

[dead]