Slashdot Mirror


A History of Every GUI Ever

An anonymous reader writes "I stumbled upon this site - GUIdebook, that offers a history of every GUI, from command prompts, to GEOS for the commodore 64, through Mac OSX. It's an interesting stroll down memory lane."

27 of 355 comments (clear)

  1. Scroll down memory lane by robolemon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or an interesting scroll down memory lane more like it!

    --

    I design user interfaces for a free network management application,

  2. http://www.oldos.org/ by jmays · · Score: 5, Informative

    Don't forget about Old OS. Also an interesting site!

    Includes the tragedy that is Microsoft BOB!

    --
    KARMA TAG! You're it.
  3. slashdotted at one comment. by teamhasnoi · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess I'll be using the command line today.

    1. Re:slashdotted at one comment. by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Funny

      "You had me at HTTP 1.1 GET"

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  4. Good 'ole days by maximilln · · Score: 5, Funny

    Finally, a /. article which doesn't immediately remind me of pyramid schemes, political graft, the extortion of the American people by their corporate executive overlords... (though all of these things combined contributed to the death of Commodore and the rise of the x86 architecture).

    Crap. And the site is /.'ed.

    --
    +++ATHZ 99:5:80
  5. what? by WormholeFiend · · Score: 4, Funny

    text interface counts as graphic interface?

    as opposed to what... tactile interface?

    1. Re:what? by RetroGeek · · Score: 4, Informative

      couldn't it technically be called "graphical"

      Let's not start re-inventing technical meanings. Graphical is not Text.

      A text system cannot by definition display graphics. The original IBM had two basic modes for the display, text and graphics. You had to switch them within your program. Text was MUCH faster, so you only went to graphical when you had to. It was also easier to code to the text mode.

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    2. Re:what? by Malor · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The advent of bitmap graphics at all was a big deal. In text mode, the smallest addressable unit is 'one character'. This means that an 80x24 screen takes 1920 bytes to represent. Processors are so fast these days that you could update that screen, sheesh, a hundred thousand times a second, probably. But in the days of kilohertz machines, that was quite a bit of data to push.

      The early 8-bit home computers could do bitmap graphics, and in fact it was a big selling point.... "Game XYZ, fight monsters in actual bitmap graphics!' Check out Castle Wolfenstein on the Apple 2 emulators for an idea of what 'good graphics' once meant. I don't remember the resolution of those early screens anymore, but it was very low... certainly not higher than 320x200.

      When the Mac shipped, computers really changed. Instead of a text OS with occasional, fully-focused graphical programs, the machine was so incredibly powerful (8mhz, 16 bit) that it could do graphics all the time...they could actually draw a user interface on a 512x384 screen and have time left over. That's 196,608 pixels. I don't know how many bits per pixel the first Mac used... I keep wanting to say "one", but I think I remember grays on those first Macs, so that might be wrong. If it WAS one bit per pixel, they could represent that screen in about 24k. That's still a lot of data to push around, compared with the 2k for a text screen, and could be as high as 196K if it was 8 bits/pixel. I'm pretty sure it wasn't that high... the first Mac had only 128k of RAM. Maybe it was just black/white.

      They actually managed to get a fairly good GUI up on the 1Mhz C64 with GEOS, but it was the Mac that first showed the mainstream that it was even possible.

      Everything after that has been about accelerating that basic idea. For a long time, neither the Mac nor the PC was really fast enough to animate the whole screen at once at a reasonable framerate. Games had to be very clever to work around this; even though they'd done a GUI on the 64, it was still very, very hard to animate a full screen on a PC. As I recall, that was mostly due to bus speed; the system simply couldn't shovel enough bits out to the graphics card over an ISA bus. The processor was more than capable, but the bus just wasn't up to it.

      For the last 15 years, the whole evolution of computers has been about making graphics go faster. First there were Windows (2D) accelerators, then full motion video, which flopped as a concept, because it didn't make good games and didn't work very well. A number of years ago, we finally got to the point that pretty much every computer in the world can do very smooth full motion video, and nobody even noticed, the idea was that dead. Then 3D accelerators, then GPUs, then hardware T&L.... the driving force in PC development has been graphics.

      Sometime in the last couple of years, PCs really hit a plateau; they've gotten fast enough to do practically anything we can think of, at least for now. We can generate, manipulate, and output graphics of unbelievable quality... and we're mostly pretty blase' about the whole thing.

      I'll tell you, though, if I showed my desktop machine (Athlon 2800+, GeForce FX5950, dual 36gb Raptors in RAID-0, Audigy 2 Platinum, Klipsch 5.1 speakers) to my 15-year-old self, I'd fear for my life. In 1985, I'd have killed someone with a big smile on my face to own a machine like that.

      Phew, I kinda went off on a tangent there. Getting back on track..... GUI means a very specific thing. If the OS can turn individual dots on and off, and draws the user interface that way, it's a GUI.

    3. Re:what? by mdielmann · · Score: 4, Funny

      If it's displayed on a screen, couldn't it technically be called "graphical"?

      So a hardcopy of Playboy isn't graphical? Let me guess, you read the articles...

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  6. Yes well done /. by Fisher99 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    that website is definately a memory NOW! Funny though I started with fvwm wayback, went through windows UI, CDE, kde, gnome and I'm back with fvwm2 as my main GUI.

  7. In other news... by haxor.dk · · Score: 5, Funny

    .... the internet backbone in European country Poland broke down today following a phenomenon known as "The slashdot effect". No people were harmed in the incident, but a lot of Slavic IT professionals were terribly inconvenienced.

  8. Great by lemonhed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The work by Engelbart (from PARC) directly led to the advances at Xerox PARC. Several people went from SRI to Xerox PARC in the early 1970's (where I worked).

    The Xerox PARC team codified the WIMP (windows, icons, menus and pointers) paradigm, first pioneered on the Xerox Alto experimental computer, but which eventually appeared commercially in the Xerox 8010 ('Star') system in 1981

  9. Another GUIde! by Krik+Johnson · · Score: 5, Informative

    Since this site is slashdotted, there is another GUide that I know about, which is also interesting.

    Nathan's GUI gallery. It has every version of windows, many macs, Unixes, plain wierd ones and of course the infamous Microsoft Bob. The IE is evil section is hilarious as well!

  10. Hey -Editors! by Erasmus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Shouldn't Slashdot's editors make at least a token effort to see if the pages they link to can stand the traffic they invariably direct to them?
    Is a quick email to a webmaster really such an astoundingly difficult task or is effectively DoSing every interesting small webpage on the Internet the goal?

    1. Re:Hey -Editors! by geoffspear · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hey, be quiet... you're going to ruin my best excuse for not having anything remotely interesting on my webpage!

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  11. Kind of telling by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Don't you think it's kind of telling that GUIs have required so many iterations and versions and still people havent managed to learn how to use a computer properly, they're still difficult to use and still people end up not being able to get them to do what they want.

    Yet the terminal console is almost unchanged in 30 years. Hmmmm?

  12. Oh.. "GUI" by Mateito · · Score: 5, Funny

    I prefer a Gooey

  13. Re:Slashdotted by 0x0d0a · · Score: 4, Informative

    Google doesn't store images. Right back at square one.

    The Wayback Machine doesn't have it, and it's probably too late for anyone to mirror it.

  14. GUI is graphics, CHUI is text by kherr · · Score: 4, Informative

    CHUI stands for CHaracter User Interface. Pronounced "chew-ee". I like the term for text-based interfaces, as a counterpart to the GUI. A CLI is a command-line interface, which is really somewhat different from a CHUI. Remember all those DOS apps with text-based windows and menus? Curses and Vermont Views are good examples of CHUI libraries.

  15. Missing option by Gothmolly · · Score: 4, Funny

    I use punchcards you insensitive clod!

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  16. Three ways to do graphics in text mode by tepples · · Score: 5, Informative

    A text system cannot by definition display graphics.

    Redefinable font lets you display graphics in text mode. The Defrag utility in MS-DOS 6.22 used this.

    The PC's codepages have a glyph consisting of the top half on and the bottom half off. Set each character cell's "on color" to one color and the "off color" to another and you can display graphics in text mode. Lots of ANSI BBS screens used this, and some business software packages used this for bar graphs and the like.

    And now the most from-left-field solution: Reprogramming the text generator to show four scanlines per row of glyphs rather than 16 (assuming VGA) lets you use the glyph with the left half on and the right half off for a 160x100 pixel 16 color video mode. Tunneler, an old DOS game, used this.

  17. 1 Q & 1 Obs by jpellino · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Q: so exactly which of those historical OSs hosting this just got quick-fried?

    Obs: I saw Doug Englebart a few years ago giving a large group presentation - he had the best interface I'd ever seen for a presentation - the current slide was displayed in a frame of thumbnails of the slides in the entire presentation - so you had random access to the whole show, you could see the flow, he could jump and reference other slides if needed without the typical bambi-on-ice powerpoint shuffle.

    Oh yeah, the presentation was great, too - the analogy of introducing GUIs to telling horse riders how it was going to be driving cars, ("I have to lookk in a mirror to go the other way? I can't even shave in a mirror without hurting myself...") was original, funny and insightful.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  18. The joys of proportionally spaced fonts by pubjames · · Score: 4, Interesting


    I really miss the days when screens were created from proportionally spaced fonts. When you would draw boxes on the screen with special table drawing fonts or by changing the background and foreground colours ("teletex style"). You very rarely see that these days, which is a real shame because not only is it very efficient and simple from a programming point of view, but a well designed screen in that style can be very pleasing on the eye.

    It's a shame that the only proportionally spaced web font accessible to designers is courier, which sucks. Lucida Console is nicer but not available on all systems.

    Anyone know of any web sites designed with proportionally spaced fonts?

  19. In the Beginning was the Command Line by ShinyBrowncoat · · Score: 4, Informative

    I also recommend Neal Stephenson's excellent essay on the topic of GUIs, In the Beginning was the Command Line

    --

    "They've canceled the show but we're still here. What does that make us?" "Big Damn Junkies, Sir!" "Ain't we just"
  20. Quotes... by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Found these the other day on the PC Magazine website:

    • "The introduction of OS/2 1.0 marks the start of an exciting time for the PC and PC applications. The 'OS/2 decade' has begun."
      • Charles Petzold, contributing editor, in "OS/2: A New Beginning for PC Applications," PC Magazine April 12, 1988.

    • "A funny thing's happening on the road to OS/2. Microsoft Windows has turned into the dazzling multitasking operating system that OS/2 is still struggling to become."
      • Gus Venditto, executive editor, reviewing the brand-spanking-new Microsoft Windows 3.0, First Looks, PC Magazine July 1990.


    /not trying to start a flamewar, just fascinating quotes...
  21. ancient Commodore video hardware by Sloppy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    A text system cannot by definition display graphics.
    (Just to be pedantic... Actually, not really trying to 'correct' anything you said; I just wanna show off what an old geezer I am.)

    Tell that to VIC20 programmers. Unlike the C64, the VIC20 didn't have a graphics mode. But you could display a 16x16 grid showing the whole character set, and then tell the video hardware to look up the character definitions somewhere in RAM instead of using the ROM. This effectively gave you a 128 pixel by 128 pixel bitmap display, on a "text-only" system.

    ... and we liked it! (Well, ok, not really.)

    Oh, and speaking of the fact that text mode is faster than graphics, there was a "joke" later in the mid 80s, having to do with that. If you wrote a BASIC program on the C64 that, say, computed and printed the first 100 prime numbers, and then did the same thing on the Amiga, the C64 was faster. People would say, "Huh? How can that be? The Amiga's blazing 7 MHz 16-bit 68000 runs rings around the 6510!" But then you'd do it, and the C64 would really win. It had nothing to do with the how fast the processors could compute primes, though. It was just that the C64 could copy 2k of RAM (the amount of work to "scroll" the text display) faster than the Amiga blitter could copy several hundred k to "scroll" a graphic display. (The Amiga didn't have a text mode. ;-)

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  22. Re:Seriously... by LinuxHam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Linux and the Free software community has grown to achieve business acceptance. /. is like MTV, except the people who actually brought Linux to the corporate world don't realize that they're too old to keep coming back.

    MTV doesn't have a single show aimed at 30 somethings (let alone 40ish and 50ish) so I can delete the channel from my favorites list. I can't quite do that with our beloved /. yet. Yet.

    --
    Intelligent Life on Earth