windows ugly and mac pretty ?!?

J

JVC

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Oct 24, 2004
Messages
1,280
why is that in windows, icons and wallpapers and gadgets look so ugly. and on the macs they are so pretty. is it because apple works harder in making them or is it because of some windows, technical, limitations??
 
windows users arent impressed w silly things as icons and laptops in manilla envelopes.
 
Use a program to theme your windows, thousands of icon sets, unlimited wallpapers, etc. download any gadget you want or write your own that looks better. Do you have a real complaint or..?
 
Designers at Microsoft tend to be more heavy handed than those who design for Apple. It's not just their operating system interfaces but also things like their package design, their product design, their advertising, and even their corporate presentations.

It has nothing to do with a technical limitation of Windows but more to do with a differing design philosophy within the companies.
 
I hate that toolbar that is always on top on macs :mad: I use windows blinds, object dock and iconpackager to sex up my desktop (win xp). I think vista looks very nice as thats where the icons and themes come from. deviantart is an awesome place for everyone!
 
Must be a matter of taste because OSX looks pretty similar to Ubuntu (after some tweaking) to me and I prefer the look of Vista and XP.
 
I think it probably has something to do with the fact this is a completely subjective topic, and is strictly a matter of opinion. I prefer the look of Vista over OSX, but that's my opinion.

Why do some cars look ugly, but others look great? Obviously the people who buy the "ugly" cars don't think their ugly.
 
I'll stick with a company that prioritizes functionality over appearance any day.

Regardless of how "pretty" you find it, I find that I can't get things done with the Mac interface nearly as fast as I can with the Windows interface. As well, I like Aero at least as much as I like the Mac interface, although I don't like either as much as Linux's Beryl.

Here's a question: Why can't Apple make a laptop that looks as good as a Thinkpad?
 
Arainach said:
Here's a question: Why can't Apple make a laptop that looks as good as a Thinkpad?
Click to expand...

LMAO...
I have never understood this. Color it all black or SOMETHING... They still look like a notebook you'd see in 1988 ;)


But like DeaconFrost said, it's preference. IMO Vista's icons look just fine. And the huge advantage Windows has over the Mac is you can change it however you please... The Mac is pretty locked down to change.

Windows is more "Professionally" designed and oriented... Like already said, the packaging, marketing, etc all shows this. Mac is more "Casual, Shiny" designed (lack a better word at the moment).
 
I find good and bad in any GUI. OS X looks pretty, but I don't necessarily find it to be better or worse than XP (Classic theme) or Vista Aero. I'd probably like Aero the best if it was a little more efficient on space (nevermind Vista's general negatives). I like the glassy windows.

I can say OS X is the only OS I've used that just looks plain *wrong* with a solid colored background. The first time I used it I was like "What do you mean there's no solid black background option?!!"... After making my own I realized why.. OS X ain't made to use anything but pretty, colorful backgrounds. Solid colors don't do it justice at all. It took me longer to find a good 1920x1200 background for my Macbook Pro then it took me to install AND tweak Vista on my other laptop.
 
thanks all for reply.

i do think too that vista is a huge step forward towards prettiness. :D

yes mac laptop look ugly imo.
 
i was talking about the inside desktop.

and the other one i was talking about its exterior appereance.
 
Yep, Windows has the huge advantage of being customizable as to how it looks. You can either buy a professional package like Windows Blind or download free packages and use a hacked theme.dll for free. I've seen some crazy themes for Windows that completely changes its look and functionality.
 
TechieSooner said:
LMAO...
Windows is more "Professionally" designed and oriented... Like already said, the packaging, marketing, etc all shows this.
Click to expand...

I actually said nothing of the sort. I described Microsoft's designs as heavy handed not as professionally designed and oriented.

This pretty much says it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JL89GmwWj-M

But as it has been said, it is all subjective, I just don't like being attributed with things I didn't say. :)
 
meatycheesyboy said:
I actually said nothing of the sort. I described Microsoft's designs as heavy handed not as professionally designed and oriented.
Click to expand...
Guess I wasn't super clear...
I was meaning all of their designs, like you had said, are consistent throughout their marketing and such.

Attributing "Professional" look was my opinion... HTH.

DeaconFrost said:
See, it is all subjective.
Click to expand...
Man, OWNED!!!
 
I don't think anyone else has pointed it out yet, so i will.

Appearance wise, OS X is very customizable just like windows, but is somewhat limited in functionality customization. you generally can't change/remove the main elements of the GUI (Dock, menu) but as a general rule everyone I've talked to really would never give up any of those main elements.

Mostly the only extensive functionality changes to windows I've seen are adding a dock or some sort of launcher, which OS X already has.

I love the functionality and look of OS X. Vista looks better than XP, but I still would not go back to either one.

My vote is on macs for having better looking hardware and thinkpads for my #1 in the PC category.
 
It is likely because of each company's target audience. Apple's target is generally the end/home consumers and artists. Microsoft tries to be more general. As such, Apple tries to make their product more appealing for the average user/artist by making it default icon set and whatnot more...artsy, I guess. They likely put more time into it because it serves as a marketing point on its own.
Microsoft, however, is trying to sell their system to everyone, including business people, techies, and such. In particular, they sell their system to more (as in number) utilitarian purposes such as corporations and schools, where pretty is not a requirement. And if anything, Microsoft will not spend any time on anything if it doesn't absolutely have to (like QC), but that's just me...
 
Arainach said:
I'll stick with a company that prioritizes functionality over appearance any day.

Regardless of how "pretty" you find it, I find that I can't get things done with the Mac interface nearly as fast as I can with the Windows interface. As well, I like Aero at least as much as I like the Mac interface, although I don't like either as much as Linux's Beryl.

Here's a question: Why can't Apple make a laptop that looks as good as a Thinkpad?
Click to expand...

this is stupid. Apple has a lot of people that do nothing BUT ensure that functionality is a huge part of any design aspect.

perhaps you can't get as much done as fast because you don't use it as often?
 
retrorocketz said:
this is stupid. Apple has a lot of people that do nothing BUT ensure that functionality is a huge part of any design aspect.

perhaps you can't get as much done as fast because you don't use it as often?
Click to expand...
I doubt it. I've jumped between nearly even Linux WM in existence and been able to adapt to them and be quite productive within an hour, two max. Mac? Not so much so. Plain and simpler, everything tends to get slower and more annoying.

Also, don't act like Apple's some revolutionary here. I've interviewed with and had multiple conversations with Microsoft's interface team. They're quite aware of what they're doing as well.
 
DeaconFrost said:
I think it probably has something to do with the fact this is a completely subjective topic, and is strictly a matter of opinion. I prefer the look of Vista over OSX, but that's my opinion.

Why do some cars look ugly, but others look great? Obviously the people who buy the "ugly" cars don't think their ugly.
Click to expand...

100% agreed. I like Vista over OSX personally as well, but many feel the other way. The great thing is that it is dead easy to skin OSes these days so if you dont like it, change it.


Windows has been very much function over asthetics and that is the main reason IMO for the less flashy GUI. Windows also plays very good with adapting to many different settings and uses where OSX is meant to be pretty and used as it is (this is not a debate, just the way it is...you dont see OSX being put as an embedded OS on computerized milling machines for example, where windows can still work great with its very simple graphics (native in 2000 and prior, classic mode in Vista/XP))

TechieSooner said:
LMAO...
I have never understood this. Color it all black or SOMETHING... They still look like a notebook you'd see in 1988 ;)
Click to expand...


The funny thing is my thinkpad gets mistaken for a macbook all the time. It is very simple classic styling on the thinkpads that has made them timeless, the new macbooks are very simple styled as well and have come full circle back to what IBM has always stayed with :p
 
JVC said:
why is that in windows, icons and wallpapers and gadgets look so ugly. and on the macs they are so pretty. is it because apple works harder in making them or is it because of some windows, technical, limitations??
Click to expand...

personal opinion.
 
JVC said:
why is that in windows, icons and wallpapers and gadgets look so ugly. and on the macs they are so pretty. is it because apple works harder in making them or is it because of some windows, technical, limitations??
Click to expand...

Oh n0es... we've lost another one to the Reality Distortion Field!!! Run... run for your lives!!! (old time Mac vs PC people know this implicitly, the new folks might or might not get it...)

And yes, "pretty" is a purely personal perspective and point of view. Say that fast 3x...

I find the Windows interface elegant and functional. In Vista, some aspects are not particularly to my own liking, such as some parts of how Explorer (when running as a file explorer, not the actual interface shell) works now compared to the old days. Hell, during the betas of Vista they actually completely removed the List view which pissed me off to no end. Suffice to say over time myself and a few thousand other beta testers bitched, moaned, whined, and cried enough to sway the developers to re-add the List view towards the very end of the beta process and pre-RC. Thank some higher power for that.

As for OSX, well, sure it's pretty, it has to be because that's the primary attraction. Most people that buy Apple products will tell you right off the bat: "It's gorgeous" or "It's beautiful" and rarely if ever substantiate the actual hardware functionality in any appreciable way, shape, or... wait, all they care about is the form, so that doesn't work. Hrmmm...

It's a tool like any other, and that's all I have to say about that.
 
Arainach said:
. I've interviewed with and had multiple conversations with Microsoft's interface team. They're quite aware of what they're doing as well.
Click to expand...

ahah. After the Vista disaster you say this? OSX isnt perfect either, but lets face it, MS shipped something broken with intent to fix it later. It quite pisses me off, having bought this broken crap. If I could switch for another copy of XP, I would in a heartbeat.
 
Personally, I think Vista is a nice, sleek looking operating system that performs very well. I'm very happy with it so far.
 
retrorocketz said:
MS shipped something broken with intent to fix it later. It quite pisses me off, having bought this broken crap.
Click to expand...
MS didn't ship anything broken. Try to understand the entire scope of the issue to realize Vista itself is fine. It's stability relies on that of all the myriad of hardware and drivers out there. It quite pisses me off when one individual has a problem with anything, and assumes everyone has this same issue.

I am by no means an Apple fan, but just yesterday I was setting up a new Mac Pro, and it crashed on me. The problem....Norton AV. I'm smart enough to know, that I shouldn't go off on an anti-Apple rant, because it wasn't their fault.
 
retrorocketz said:
ahah. After the Vista disaster you say this? OSX isnt perfect either, but lets face it, MS shipped something broken with intent to fix it later. It quite pisses me off, having bought this broken crap. If I could switch for another copy of XP, I would in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...
What DeaconFrost said. Microsoft could release the greatest OS the world's ever seen if they'd give up on the backwards compatibility, but their users continuously demand the impossible. Windows 7 seems to have finally gotten the right idea, however - wait and see how that turns out

Plus, even the usual array of mindless Vista bashers who can't describe what it is they don't like with specifics have never complained about the interface being broken.
 
retrorocketz said:
ahah. After the Vista disaster you say this? OSX isnt perfect either, but lets face it, MS shipped something broken with intent to fix it later. It quite pisses me off, having bought this broken crap. If I could switch for another copy of XP, I would in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

You can downgrade from Vista to XP AFAIK
 
DeaconFrost said:
MS didn't ship anything broken. Try to understand the entire scope of the issue to realize Vista itself is fine. It's stability relies on that of all the myriad of hardware and drivers out there. It quite pisses me off when one individual has a problem with anything, and assumes everyone has this same issue.

I am by no means an Apple fan, but just yesterday I was setting up a new Mac Pro, and it crashed on me. The problem....Norton AV. I'm smart enough to know, that I shouldn't go off on an anti-Apple rant, because it wasn't their fault.
Click to expand...

I didn't say I had any hardware issues. I didn't. Amazing that you go putting words into my mouth. It 'quite pisses me off' when people do that.
Google up ui inconsistencies for Vista and have fun.

I won't even get into how slow vista is doing anything with disk access or over a network. This has been proven by any huge range of pro websites.
 
DeaconFrost said:
I am by no means an Apple fan, but just yesterday I was setting up a new Mac Pro, and it crashed on me. The problem....Norton AV. I'm smart enough to know, that I shouldn't go off on an anti-Apple rant, because it wasn't their fault.
Click to expand...
It's the OS's design that allowed an application the crash the system. Ideally an OS would not allow this to happen. So really it's both their faults.
 
Joe Average said:
Hell, during the betas of Vista they actually completely removed the List view which pissed me off to no end. Suffice to say over time myself and a few thousand other beta testers bitched, moaned, whined, and cried enough to sway the developers to re-add the List view towards the very end of the beta process and pre-RC. Thank some higher power for that.
Click to expand...
IMO this is another reason Windows will always be superior in market share as well: they listen.
Apple secretively designs/tests their stuff with minimal user input...

Businesses like input.
So do home users.

Vista had over 100,000 people surveyed, and the results were Vista.

retrorocketz said:
MS shipped something broken with intent to fix it later. .
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:
I'd say the only thing I considered broken with Vista is what is below (the network speeds). The rest are the fault of Creative, NVidia, whatever.

retrorocketz said:
I won't even get into how slow vista is doing anything with disk access or over a network. This has been proven by any huge range of pro websites.
Click to expand...
I'd say this is a valid argument (That has been fixed in SP1)... Network Speeds were horrible, I'd give you that.
Really don't know any other issues with Vista itself though.

Edit- And TY to the mod who deleted duplicate post below ;)
 
retrorocketz said:
I won't even get into how slow vista is doing anything with disk access or over a network. This has been proven by any huge range of pro websites.
Click to expand...
All proven to be fixed by a huge range of websites as well. As someone already mentioned to you, you can downgrade to XP. If you'd stop looking for an argument for a few minutes, you'd see that by purchasing a license for Vista, you are legally entitled to downgrade. How to go about doing that, I don't know, never had a reason to.
 
desktop2.jpg


I find the Vista desktop strangely appealing. Point being, plenty of ways to improve it.

P.S. XP's desktop sucked, winblinds 100%!
 
Is that the StarDock software.....that you are using for the OSX-like dock at the bottom?
 
After setting up a Mac Pro, I wanted to look into getting this dock again. I used to use Y'Z Dock, but I think that was discontinued, per Apple's wishes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top