On: Windows 98 icons are great (2015)

[anthk]

Ugly? Why? Ugly would be Amiga 3.1 with odd proportion based icons and crude widgets. Win 9x looks functional and usable, with 3D hints everywhere.

[ilyt → anthk]

Yes, it looks functional and usable, I already said that.

I just find the look ugly. There is no objectivism in preference to how something looks.

[anthk → ilyt]

I wouldn't see that as "ugly". Highly functional, maybe utterly boring, but not ugly. I mean, w9x looks as boring as an Ikea stool.

Ugly would be, with no arguing, the first editions of Amiga OS. Look:

http://toastytech.com/guis/amiga1.html

http://toastytech.com/guis/amiga2.html

Windows 95, being designed for 256 colors, looks really fine. Ok, Mac's System 7 it's prettier, without any doubt, but as I said the Amiga OS 1/2.x versions are far worse.

Windows 95 it's boring in the sense of being tied to a corporation based style, with cubicles.