Hacker News Reader

Comment by xnorswap | Hacker News Reader

I still think windows 2000 looks the best out of that bunch, if not for the lack of font antialiasing.

Windows 10 does a pretty good job too if not for the mess that is finding yourself in a universe of completely different UI paradigms that suddenly lurch from one to another, especially when navigating settings.

View on HN

Windows 2003 Server was the pinnacle - it looked and felt like Windows 2000, but had XP-era improvements, including ClearType (subpixel font antialiasing).

I used to run this modded distro of Windows2003 called "tiny2003". It was my favorite Windows experience.

You could easily switch WinXP to use the classic theme, which made it look the same as Win2003.

Win7 with the Classic Theme was the peak of UI/UX, IMO.

On the Mac side OS 10.8.5 felt the same way. Last versions of software specifically designed for desktop computing, maybe.

Even the default out of the box color scheme of WS 2003 was fantastic. Indeed the pinnacle of Windows UI design.

Black text on Grey background was nice. I am not sure why we switched to dark grey text on white background or light grey text on black background.

I agree that Windows 2000 looks the best. I inherited a system that was running Windows Server 2003 that we have since replaced with up-to-date software. We needed to do it, of course but, the Windows 2000 UI was way better than what we have today. It was simpler but also more consistent.

What really bothers me is they removed the possibility to set the interface to the good old windows nt interface after windows 7. Okay, Microsoft wants to implement sim crappy new UI. At least give me the option to make it right

Reply on news.ycombinator.com