> Comparing IRIX 4DWM desktop to the Canon Cat is like saying you prefer the UI on your washing machine.

Equation (as opposed to comparison) and preference are two very different things, friend. And yes, I'm one of those weirdos who prefers minimal, low-color, high-res, high-contrast, and angular/facetted (almost brutalist) GUIs and TUIs to, say, SGIs offerings. Like the Canon Cat's and many others. We'll both live.

> [...] the engineering team had designers in it, and it shows.

The GUI is not as grotten ugly to me as those from most modern offerings, or certain vintage offenders, e. g. early-to-mid Workbench, Windows XP (excluding the Classic Theme), I'll give you that. But it certainly doesn't knock me out of my socks.

▲

fidotron 3 days ago | parent [-]

> high-res, high-contrast, and angular/facetted (almost brutalist) GUIs

The implied criticism here of IRIX being low res, low contrast and in any way having rounded edges demonstrates some serious ignorance of the subject.

▲

spankibalt 2 days ago | parent [-]

> The implied criticism here of IRIX being low res, low contrast and in any way having rounded edges demonstrates some serious ignorance of the subject.

The criticism, "implications" (i. e. your speculations) aside, is that based on the screenshots of the desktop I've seen it's just not enough for me. Not even close.

But since I've never used an SGI workstation, I am indeed largely ignorant of its "hidden" UI/UX qualities. And who knows? Maybe you can pimp the desktop's visual design enough that even I fall in love with it.

▲

fidotron 2 days ago | parent [-]

Your claims are IRIX is not "high res" and not "angular/facetted", both of which are objectively ludicrous, regardless of your feelings on the matter.

> But since I've never used an SGI workstation

Evidently.

▲

spankibalt 2 days ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

	▲	fidotron 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		> I suggest you get over it and invest in some evidently much needed English-language remedial classes. So you're just a contrarian troll.