• still cringing (unregistered) in reply to DaveE1

    DaveE1:
    This is what an operating system looks like from the inside-out.

    My young cousin, 2nd year in law school, had to go to her first autopsy recently - this look exactly like what she described she saw

  • (cs) in reply to zgoda
    zgoda:
    twks:
    This actually seems like a really powerful program.  It may take like a year to master the dashboard, but once you do, you can become quite productive. 


    This reminds me one article... Do you know why stealth bombers have more complicated user interface than tricycles? Because they can fly! This program should skyrocket.

    Also because I don't want my 2 year old to have JDAMs!
  • still cringing (unregistered) in reply to bullseye
    Anonymous:

    Anonymous:

    Anonymous:
    <FONT size=-1>This was originally posted a few years ago on "UI Hall of Shame".

    </FONT>
    omg are you serious? read "Alex is out of town today, so let's revisit a classic! " from the original post

    There is always a representative from that group that failed reading comprehension...  the sad thing is that it probably won't be the last post.

    CAPTCHA = hacker

    not to knock a knock, but might it not be possible that the poster, like me, might not have known about the wonders of TDWTF at the time of the original post?

     

    captcha = batman (they're getting better - I vote for more captcha comedy)

  • codemoose (unregistered) in reply to still cringing

    Shamelessly recycled cliche #710:
    Excuse me while I pry my eyeballs out of my keyboard.

  • (cs) in reply to codemoose

    This kind of UI complexity is usually reserved for top-end 3D development software, like XSI, Maya and MAX.

    Ambitious!

    I bet he can charge $6000 too!

  • (cs) in reply to dhromed

    Have anyone noticed the "FileMatrix.exe.manifest"?

    CAPTCHA=genius (it did say that before i signed in)

  • jon (unregistered) in reply to Sizer
    Anonymous:
    I think I know where this came from. There used to be a hugely popular file manager on the Amiga which worked like this, with two differences. First, it didn't have rounded buttons because on the Amiga the height of chic was flat rectangles. And second, it had far fewer buttons - I assume that with more resolution comes the freedom to cram in as many buttons as you possibly can. Also (our THREE weapons are...) I don't think there was live preview of files.

    But this is classic Amiga UI - just throw everything together on the page. And given long enough you'll learn where everything is.



    I hope that's DirWork you're talking about!

  • (cs) in reply to reagan83
    reagan83:

    Anonymous:
    The goggles... they do nothing!

    Why is it that when a wtf is accompanied with a screenshot someone always has to say this?

    Alex should implement a voting system like digg so these comments would be hidden after being demoted below the threshold.



    Agreed.
    Also I hate to be a quote-nazi here, but the quote is "My eyes.. The goggles do nothing!"
    It just bugs me a little every time it gets misquoted.
  • steve (unregistered) in reply to hmemcpy
    hmemcpy:

    Oh. My. God.

    Eyes hurt!



    Did you try the goggles?

    They won't work, it's just what we do around here.
  • (cs) in reply to R.Flowers
    R.Flowers:
    The name that comes to mind is "Directory Opus." At least I think it looked like this in its earlier incarnations.


    Opus never looked that bad, even the first version. Keep in mind these were the days of extremely low-res screens (this shot has been doubled horizontally due to the 1:2 pixel aspect of the original) where you'd have 8 or 16 colours:

    http://www.pretentiousname.com/random/opus4_amiga.gif

    As the Amiga become more powerful and new fangled ideas like icons and floating windows and right-click menus became popular Opus evolved into something much more modern, within the limitations of the OS/hardware (my poor A1200 ran very slowly with this configuration, I usually ran it at half the resolution, but there were better machines that could run at-the-time incredible 800x600 256 colour displays:

    http://www.pretentiousname.com/random/opus5_amiga.gif

    Opus now exists for Windows and has an incredibly configurable UI which will look as ugly and cluttered or beautiful and minimal as you like, and you can have as many or few toolbars, menus and hybrids of the two (plus stuff like buttons which have different actions on left/middle/right click for related functions without the clutter) as you like:

    http://www.pretentiousname.com/random/opus8_windows1.png
    http://www.pretentiousname.com/random/opus8_windows2.png

  • (cs)

    <font size="5">A</font>nyone care to guess what file or files would be deleted if the delete button (lower left corner) was clicked?

  • (cs) in reply to triso

    triso:
    <FONT size=5>A</FONT>nyone care to guess what file or files would be deleted if the delete button (lower left corner) was clicked?

    I bet $5 that it would depend on the selected column and may also remove a track from the playlist as well. I never used this thing actually and that's why I bet that low, but it's common sense to work this way. Now tell me if I win or not :)

  • (cs)

    This reminds me of the first time I saw TOAD with all the toolbars & options enabled.  You had about 1 square inch in which to write SQL statements.  I'd have to say TOAD beats this hands down in terms of usability.

    Larry

  • (cs)

    I "like" the icons and the rounded corners of the buttons. Makes it much better (understandable, easy to navigate and clear what it is), doesn't it? If someone decided to put some crappy icons like the poor guys at MS with their Word it would be so damn unclear and you would have to point each icon to understand what it does...

    Ok that was black humor. Couldn't resist

    I guess if this guy who designed this "creature" has to create a toolbar for an application and the customer insists on using icons instead of text buttons he (or she?) would put red, green, blue and yellow squared, circles and triangles filled or just the outline :)

  • RTMFD (unregistered)

    Looks like any eclipse "perspective" to me. Eclipse is a pile of dogsh*t when it comes to the UI.

  • (cs) in reply to lpope187

    lpope187:
    This reminds me of the first time I saw TOAD with all the toolbars & options enabled.  You had about 1 square inch in which to write SQL statements.  I'd have to say TOAD beats this hands down in terms of usability.

    You need a bigger monitor, pal :) TOAD isn't bad actually and the schema browser's table filtering capabilities are very helpful to me, but I really miss the shortcut to open a new window to execute a second sql statement and compare the results like in Query Analyzer... now tell me there IS some shortcut like the CTRL+N in QA but I didn't find it in the menus and I'll commit a harakiri.

  • (cs) in reply to Sizer
    Anonymous:
    I think I know where this came from. There used to be a hugely popular file manager on the Amiga which worked like this, with two differences. First, it didn't have rounded buttons because on the Amiga the height of chic was flat rectangles. And second, it had far fewer buttons - I assume that with more resolution comes the freedom to cram in as many buttons as you possibly can. Also (our THREE weapons are...) I don't think there was live preview of files.

    But this is classic Amiga UI - just throw everything together on the page. And given long enough you'll learn where everything is.


    No, this isn't "Classic Amiga UI". The tool you are referring to is called Directory Opus, and that (At version 4) had a very fixed view. Two columns (Listers) with user-programmable buttons underneath. The number of buttons you had was completely at the user's discretion. This format is one of the most versatile systems, and has been copied by many, many programs. However, in the next version, DOpus was changed. It then replaced the workbench windows with more customisable "Listers" (One column per lister, and everything multi-threaded). You could then define the view, the right-click menus, the context-sensitive actions, everything. DOpus was (And still is) very powerful, and has been ported (Ish) to Windows as well.

    Oh, and to say that flat rectangles for buttons was the "height of chic" is just wrong. Flatter buttons take less space. And if you wanted to you could have 3D-shaded buttons. Though round buttons are a huge waste of space if you need to fit a lot into a UI (After all, you have to make allowances for the radius of the button so your text doesn't overlap).

    And no, there wasn't "Live Preview". But there was automatic filetype sensing (As the Amiga had no hangups about having to have a file extension. In fact, you could have a filename 36 characters long with no "."s in it whatsoever. And as such, eliminated all confusion over .txt.exe (Or whatever), as well as being fully internationalisable (The characters '/' and ':' are forbidden in file and volume names, but *!@#$%|^+&_()=\-[]{}';",<>.? and accented like âè are allowed)).

    As a former Amiga user/coder, I take offense at this, just as a Mac user would take offense at the "Mac UI" being described as a dialog box with a single round button and no meaningful message, or a Linux user being offended at the "Linux UI" being described as a command-line (Along with the perfect Linux editor being cat >> file.txt)
  • (cs) in reply to still cringing
    Anonymous:

    DaveE1:
    This is what an operating system looks like from the inside-out.

    My young cousin, 2nd year in law school, had to go to her first autopsy recently - this look exactly like what she described she saw

    <font size="5">I </font>hope you mean med. school.
  • (cs) in reply to nsimeonov
    nsimeonov:

    You need a bigger monitor, pal :) TOAD isn't bad actually and the schema browser's table filtering capabilities are very helpful to me, but I really miss the shortcut to open a new window to execute a second sql statement and compare the results like in Query Analyzer... now tell me there IS some shortcut like the CTRL+N in QA but I didn't find it in the menus and I'll commit a harakiri.



    It isn't bad on my laptop with the standard toolbars.  The first time I saw it was at a job interview.  The guy I was interviewing for had every toolbar displayed and must have been running at 800x600.

    What's Query Analyzer?  Hasn't everybody upgraded to SQL2005 and SQL Management Studio yet?  I know you can create a new SQL Editior window, but I don't know if there is a shortcut for it.  I just use the menu to create one.  In the full version you should be able to have multiple tabs on the same SQL Editor window - probably won't help for comparisons though.  The only really annoying "feature" of TOAD is its stupid auto-tabbing feature.  It takes me twice as long to format the SQL statement to be readable as it does to actually write the SQL statement.

    Larry
  • (cs) in reply to nsimeonov
    nsimeonov:

    triso:
    <font size="5">A</font>nyone care to guess what file or files would be deleted if the delete button (lower left corner) was clicked?

    I bet $5 that it would depend on the selected column and may also remove a track from the playlist as well. I never used this thing actually and that's why I bet that low, but it's common sense to work this way. Now tell me if I win or not :)

    <font size="5">I</font> don't know if you are right but common sense tells me that with an interface so unintuitive, common sense does not apply.

  • (cs) in reply to triso

    triso:
    <FONT size=5>I</FONT> don't know if you are right but common sense tells me that with an interface so unintuitive, common sense does not apply.

    I wonder how the code looks like... Does it have numbered variables with comments like the hotel system I dealt with or it's better (can't imagine it's worse than that... no way)... and what language it's written too... I'm really curious about that.

  • foxyshadis (unregistered) in reply to GoatCheez
    GoatCheez:
    I'm still trying to figure out what problem was presented for the author to think something like this needed to be created. WTF man. So like, was this someone who saw Norton Commander and thought that Windows should have something like that, but with tons of more features not related to the application's intensions (including an embeded MP3 player that only plays bad techno, tennie-bopper music, and not-so-hits of the 80's)?

    Norton Commander clones still have a shockingly high market penetration among old-timers. I can't figure out why people do it, even explorer is easier to use, let alone nifty ones like Finder derivatives. Maybe it's just a preference for totally non-contextual shells.

    Anonymous:

    If I turn on every option in Word or something similar, then I will end up working in a postage stamp - but that's my fault, not Word's.


    Of course word is a fantastic example of good simple UI gone rogue by years of "just one more icon" and "just one more toolbar" creep, and OpenOffice follows its proud tradition of crowbar featuritis. (Whether the Ribbon is magic answer or not I'll leave up to the market.)
  • Stoffel (unregistered)

    I have no room to speak on this one.

    When I was interning at my current company, we were designing what was basically a modem (v.32bis! anybody know what that means anymore?)  I was programming a driver interface between what physically would become the modem on a dev board inside a PC and the COM port on the PC.  So the whole PC would look like a "modem" to a 9-pin serial cable.

    This was in the days of DOS.  So I wanted a UI that would show the status of everything going on at the time.

    I filled every single character of that 80x25 real-estate with some form of status.  We had multiple threads, so there was a single character per thread that would highlight as the thread became active, then dim when the thread left.  Message readout windows, tx and rx data windows, signal indicators, bandwidth indicators.

    THEN, I found a command that let you go to 50 columns, doubling my potential real estate!!

    "Angry Fruit Salad" was how one co-worker described the display.

  • (cs) in reply to phithe

    phithe:
    Also I hate to be a quote-nazi here, but the quote is "My eyes.. The goggles do nothing!"

    Strange site, and strange source. Found:

    var lines = new Array("", "", "");

    for (var i=0; i<lines.length; i++) {
     strlen = lines[i].length;
     if      (strlen >= 20) { cur_count = 21; }
     else if (strlen >= 15) { cur_count = 25; }
     else if (strlen >= 13) { cur_count = 30; }
     else if (strlen >= 12) { cur_count = 35; }
     else if (strlen >= 10) { cur_count = 40; }
     else if (strlen >= 10) { cur_count = 45; }
     else                   { cur_count = 50; }

     if (cur_count < max_count) {
       max_count = cur_count;
     }
    }

    in it. Love the name max_count which is minimum.

  • deja-vu (unregistered)

    If the wtf is recycled, then are the comments recycled too?

  • (cs)

    I realy like the "Toobar" control. The structure of it is lost between Toolbar and (Binnary)TreeView.

    ..and it'a a typo...too.

    two,to,too,...just like 2+2=2*2=2**2.

    Ok, I need some gooooood sleep.

  • Sizer (unregistered) in reply to R.Flowers
    R.Flowers:
    Anonymous:
    I think I know where this came from. There used to be a hugely popular file manager on the Amiga which worked like this, with two differences.


    The name that comes to mind is "Directory Opus." At least I think it looked like this in its earlier incarnations. I used 1 or 2 of the shareware "work-alikes.".


    Ah yes, that was it. Thank you. I used it for quite a while and now I can't even remember the name. Hopefully the two are not related.


  • (cs)

    All of that and yet no "Caps lock" or "Num lock" indicator? (Or did I just miss it in the mess?)

  • (cs) in reply to Nudel
    Nudel:
    R.Flowers:
    The name that comes to mind is "Directory Opus." At least I think it looked like this in its earlier incarnations.


    Opus never looked that bad, even the first version. Keep in mind these were the days of extremely low-res screens (this shot has been doubled horizontally due to the 1:2 pixel aspect of the original) where you'd have 8 or 16 colours:

    http://www.pretentiousname.com/random/opus4_amiga.gif

    <etc>


    Thanks for the screenshots. As I said, I had not used Opus. I still have an old A2000/ 68030 / 8 MB / 512 MB HD / SCSI CD-ROM with AmigaOS 3.0. The base machine itself is rather old, even for the 2000s, and quite frankly I don't have the money to buy the antique parts to make it a "nice." (For example, I don't have any kind of extra graphics card.) But I still crank it up from time to time. I may sell it on eBay some day, either by parts or as a whole.
  • CJP (unregistered)

    I read the Wikipedia page on this program, and it has two external links:

    One to the website where the program can be downloaded
    And one called "UI criticism" linking to thedailywtf.com

  • John Hensley (unregistered) in reply to home homine lupus est
    Anonymous:
    This rounded buttons look strange. Almost like a smaltalk gui, or the Oberon Component Pascal OS.

    FYI you are not the only reader who immediately thought of Smalltalk. There aren't many GUI frameworks that can keep up with a hacker's stream of consciousness (without delays for compiling, debugger stepping, etc.) and I doubt a UI like this could have been developed with anything less.

  • Robert. (unregistered) in reply to Stoffel
    Anonymous:
    I have no room to speak on this one.

    When I was interning at my current company, we were designing what was basically a modem (v.32bis! anybody know what that means anymore?)  I was programming a driver interface between what physically would become the modem on a dev board inside a PC and the COM port on the PC.  So the whole PC would look like a "modem" to a 9-pin serial cable.

    This was in the days of DOS.  So I wanted a UI that would show the status of everything going on at the time.

    I filled every single character of that 80x25 real-estate with some form of status.  We had multiple threads, so there was a single character per thread that would highlight as the thread became active, then dim when the thread left.  Message readout windows, tx and rx data windows, signal indicators, bandwidth indicators.

    THEN, I found a command that let you go to 50 columns, doubling my potential real estate!!

    "Angry Fruit Salad" was how one co-worker described the display.


    Sounded like it deserved the epithet.

    It's a well-known description -Listed in the Jargon File-. It's first listing in google groups is from 1992 - I wonder, did your useage predate that?

    captcha=creative : I don't think so! There would be few OCRs that would have a problem with it!
  • FlyGuy (unregistered) in reply to ammoQ
    ammoQ:
    This UI comes from a guy who had worked in the aerospace industry before, designing the cockpits of airplanes and space shuttles.


    Nice hipshot. . .   but not the case.    Maybe you should talk to a guy who actually flies the space shuttle.

  • anônimo (unregistered) in reply to Hux

    Except for "a-ha - Crying In The Rain". :-)
    a-ha is great.

  • (cs)

    The real wtf is the 'sexual education' inactive file on the left...

  • (cs)

    Wow, he must have really misunderstood the idee of eyecandy

  • schlenk (unregistered) in reply to Sizer

    Your talking about DirectoryOpus right? Kind of NortonCommander on Steroids and actually a decent file manager after you wasted days configuring all the goodies. (similar to most X window managers nowadays...) One main difference was a 'configure' screen, which removed most of the configuration options from the main screen, which just had two file lists, a lot of shortcuts to directories and drives (like the windows file dialogs, but configurable for your prefered folders), and lots of command buttons where you could put REXX scripts or any other commands you liked.

    But the screenshot above is just horrible..., too much junk taking too much screen space.

  • gravedigger (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous Coward

        All you ex-Amiga users may be interested to know that they are still trying to resurrect it from the dead...

  • Willy - ? µa???? ?e?µast?? ap? t? ???µp??t? (unregistered) in reply to Hux

    You can say that again, who the fuck would ever listen to stupid pop Greek music like Antique and Mazonakis (the Opa-opa song)!?!

    Ooops... right... waves to the other malaka

  • (cs) in reply to graywh
    graywh:
    reagan83:

    Anonymous:
    The goggles... they do nothing!

    Why is it that when a wtf is accompanied with a screenshot someone always has to say this?

    Alex should implement a voting system like digg so these comments would be hidden after being demoted below the threshold.



    ::thumbs down::

    You obviously don't understand the reason for wearing goggles.  And haven't read enough comments on WTFs without screen shots.

     

    or the people who persist with these stupid goggle comments are just fu**headz...

  • (cs) in reply to Sizer

    Anonymous:
    I think I know where this came from. There used to be a hugely popular file manager on the Amiga which worked like this, with two differences. First, it didn't have rounded buttons because on the Amiga the height of chic was flat rectangles. And second, it had far fewer buttons - I assume that with more resolution comes the freedom to cram in as many buttons as you possibly can. Also (our THREE weapons are...) I don't think there was live preview of files.

    But this is classic Amiga UI - just throw everything together on the page. And given long enough you'll learn where everything is.


    hold on...I'll get out my Amiga 500 plus or 1200 (with 2nd floppy drive) out and check

  • Giles (unregistered)

    This is my first post to this forum so I'm prepared for something to go horribly wrong... (this should appear at the end of the "Classic WTF - Enter the Matrix" thread).

    In case anyone is struggling to find the WTF, here's what I can see, starting from the top.

    1. The title bar, labelled as "System information". Is the window title going to refresh itself every second? That could get very irritating. What does "July 14, 2003 (195)" mean?

    2. The menu bar. With so many buttons and panels on the main screen, it's surprising there's even a need for a menu bar. But here it is, and it seeks to alienate any Windows users by putting all the menus in a weird order, rather than the standard "File Edit View blah blah Help".

    3. Still on the menu bar: I guess I'm probably the only one who has no idea what "MPLs" are. And what menu options would you expect to find in the "Work" menu?

    4. The "board bar". This almost makes sense: click on one of the buttons to go to that view. The buttons which are just numbers I'd guess are unassigned. The (1), (2) after each label seem unnecessary though. And "This (12)" is bizarre.

    5. The columns. There are three of these - two listing file names and one listing thumbnails (the music player appears completely separate; I'll get onto that later). These seem to operate independently of each other, with one of the columns being "active" and containing the "active file". You need the hints to tell you this though - the visual cues as to which bits of the screen are active just aren't strong enough. For example, FileMatrix is an "Inactive file" - I guess this means it has been selected but the tab later went inactive. But this uses the same colour as the active "FileMatrix" column heading.

    6. More on the columns - specifically the buttons at the top of them. We're told what Fix and Thumb mean. Any guesses as to Weld, Part, SysL, Loc or Hyst? I could probably take a guess as to Prev or Load, but then again I'd probably be wrong.

    7. The file type icons. What's the difference between "D*" and a straight "D"?

    8. We appear to be given only relative path names, for instance "FileMatrix", which we find out later must refer to "E:\Program Files\FileMatrix". With all this clutter on the screen, you'd have thought they'd have found room for this one bit of useful information: which directories you're actually looking at?

    9. The music player. This appears to be completely unrelated to anything else that's happening on the screen. Will it appear and disappear when we click a different button on the "Board bar"? Who knows. We do know that it's not classed as a "column", as the column count is currently set to 3.

    10. The music player appears to have a large salmon rectangle to the left of it, and a small brown rectangle to the right of it. They're not pretty, and it's not at all obvious what purpose they serve.

    11. It's probably obvious what the "Fit" option does, but not to me.

    12. The file viewer. You might expect that this is the file that all the information below it is referring to. But it appears not. The information describes "Edit.lnk" whereas the file viewer is viewing "filematrix.txt".

    13. "* File size = 3.3 MB". I honestly can't work out which file this is referring to.

    14. The information panel. "Information about active partition, directory, file, link target" - this is just it: it's displaying information about four different things all jumbled up. You can just about work out what's referring to what, but only just.

    15. The "Toobar". This is just completely wrong. Triso asked what file the "Delete" button would delete... I'd guess it would be the "Current file", that is Edit.lnk. But then we have a "Close viewer" button - this must either do nothing or refer to a different file, since we don't have a viewer for Edit.lnk. "Options" could mean anything, as could "MPL".

    16. The drop down menus on the toolbar. 30, 3, 3, 3, 3, 6, Name, WTF? The helpful hints try to explain a few of them and leave us guessing for the rest. It's not even obvious what changing "Name" to "Time" is going to do... The files are not currently listed in order of name anyway - they're listed in order of file type, then by name.

    17. "Quickly change to a new set of colors" - shameless bloat.

    18. "[Double LMB] = Run ([Ctrl] = automove to left..." this is funny, but we can maybe let them get away with it.

    19. Overall. The screen is logically divided up into various panels, but there is no visual indication of this. The different bits just merge into each other which is what makes the whole thing so confusing. Despite the rounded button theme, there is no overall unity in the user interface design. Text fields look like buttons, which also look like toggle buttons and radio buttons. The use of colour gives you no clue as to what's going on, it just means several different parts of the screen are competing for your attention.

    So there they are, 19 WTFs. Is there anything they did right?


    Giles

  • Matthew Greet (unregistered)

    This is probably bought by people who think this kind of sophistication makes them an elite user. Without realising that there is only so much that can be usefully done with a file system and they should be operating applications.

  • (cs) in reply to Giles
    Anonymous:
    1. The title bar, labelled as "System information". Is the window title going to refresh itself every second? That could get very irritating. What does "July 14, 2003 (195)" mean?


    It's the day number.  July 14, 2003 is day 195 of that year.  Yes, I looked it up.

    15. The "Toobar". This is just completely wrong. Triso asked what file the "Delete" button would delete... I'd guess it would be the "Current file", that is Edit.lnk.


    One could only hope that the delete button refers to deleting the entire application...

    ...and the developer.

    Simon
  • Random Chaos (unregistered) in reply to wiggzie

    Just a note on Opus: In version 4 (screenshotted above), each button that has a "corner turned down" on it has more than one fuction, depending on left/right mouse button and I believe, if I recall right, keyboard button presses. This means that each button might have 2, 3, 4+ functions all hidden under one button. Oh the joys of not being able to find what you want.

    I'm surprised that the designers of the UI for the topic didn't implement something like that. With all their buttons, surely they could have used alternate buttons!

    And alternate buttons haven't vanished. Try using Alt or Ctrl (can't remember which) with Adobe products on the Mac in their print dialogs. Buttons change :)

  • Jon Passki (unregistered)

    Reminds me of ethereal

  • Skanx (unregistered)
  • HidekiAI (unregistered)

    ...or you can take the blue pill and just "dir" (or "ls -la")...

  • (cs) in reply to Anaerin
    Anaerin:
    But there was automatic filetype sensing (As the Amiga had no hangups about having to have a file extension. In fact, you could have a filename 36 characters long with no "."s in it whatsoever. And as such, eliminated all confusion over .txt.exe (Or whatever)

    Funny how everyone else moved the other way.  Apple used not to have extensions either, but then they introduced them in OS X as the next big thing to make it easier to tell what a file was.  And we all know that if Apple does something, it must be right.

    as well as being fully internationalisable (The characters '/' and ':' are forbidden in file and volume names, but *!@#$%|^+&_()=\-[]{}';",<>.? and accented like âè are allowed)).

    That's not "fully internationalisable". Fully internationalisable means you can mix Chinese and Arabic in with your trivial things like accents. Windows (in the NT series) has been able to since about 1994. Could the Amiga? Methinks not.

    As a former Amiga user/coder, I take offense at this, just as [...] a Linux user being offended at the "Linux UI" being described as a command-line (Along with the perfect Linux editor being cat >> file.txt)

    Linux users are proud of their command lines. Why, I even regularly write simple programs using "cat > file.c". Seriously. Now that must be a WTF...
  • (cs) in reply to gravedigger
    Anonymous:
        All you ex-Amiga users may be interested to know that they are still trying to resurrect it from the dead...


    And just like in "The Monkey's Paw," it would probably be something hideous... Seriously, there is just no "need" for it now, other than nostalgia. Right?

Leave a comment on “Classic WTF - Enter the Matrix”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article