[HN Gopher] Windows XP Professional
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Windows XP Professional
        
       Author : pentagrama
       Score  : 265 points
       Date   : 2025-08-07 13:58 UTC (9 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (win32.run)
 (TXT) w3m dump (win32.run)
        
       | kardianos wrote:
       | Yes please. Can I please have a simple desktop that doesn't get
       | in my way back?
        
         | FirmwareBurner wrote:
         | Linux
        
         | andrepd wrote:
         | linuxmint.org :)
        
         | saubeidl wrote:
         | Get an Arch-based distro with KDE.
        
           | Der_Einzige wrote:
           | You mean xfce? KDE is bloated. Yes it's still bloated even if
           | Valgrind says it has no memory leaks.
        
             | saubeidl wrote:
             | xfce is nice, too, but aren't they still on gtk3?
        
             | kardianos wrote:
             | I also run Linux using XFCE.
             | 
             | But some of my Clients use windows and were just "forced"
             | to upgrade their hardware and use Windows 11.
        
             | reorder9695 wrote:
             | KDE is bloated, but coming from Windows10 it feels very
             | familiar but with all of Windows' extra shite
             | (ads/tracking/sign in/fucking onedrive) chopped out. I
             | couldn't be happier with it to be honest.
             | 
             | [edit]: I forgot to mention as well, at least on arch you
             | dont have to install the (I forget the package name
             | exactly) kde applications package off pacman, if you don't
             | install it you'll need to install dolphin and a few other
             | things but it really cuts down the bloat.
        
               | jasperry wrote:
               | Yes, this. I'm a long time XFCE user but when I got a
               | beefier machine I switched to KDE, and unlike XFCE it
               | manages the hardware thoroughly enough
               | (sleep/brightness/network/audio) that I don't have to
               | manually hack anything. I tolerate the bloat for that
               | reason. I disabled all the kwallet and pim stuff though,
               | that was a mess.
        
             | dartharva wrote:
             | You mean Cinnamon? XFCE is ugly as hell and breaks a lot of
             | things.
        
             | LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
             | Does it matter when my current uptime is 51 days?
        
             | int_19h wrote:
             | It's bloated if you judge it by the standards of the WinXP
             | era. And I'm not saying that's unfair, but realistically
             | speaking, it's not an issue for any modern PC.
        
           | ikari_pl wrote:
           | or just KDE?
        
           | giancarlostoro wrote:
           | I prefer Budgie myself.
        
         | mvieira38 wrote:
         | I switched from Windows 10 to Fedora KDE 2 years ago and it's
         | been good. Not great, but good. I do have the occasional
         | problem with drivers and whatnot, but honestly Windows was just
         | as bad, just with different stuff, and Windows was much less
         | stable and much slower
        
           | askonomm wrote:
           | I also switched to KDE, and man, not needing an online
           | account to use a operating system, not having any ads or
           | constant spyware sending every click and keystroke to some ad
           | partner is absolutely amazing. Sad that to get a decent user
           | experience feels amazing, even though it's not really
           | anything special, really goes to show how bad things have
           | gotten.
        
         | pantalaimon wrote:
         | There is still Mate, the Gnome 2 fork.
        
           | freedomben wrote:
           | I'm mostly a gnome 3 guy now, but mate is way underrated
           | IMHO. I usually use it in VMs and the performance and
           | usability is incredible. For those of us who grew up on this
           | paradigm, it's a joy
        
           | LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
           | There is still Trinity, the KDE 3 fork.
           | 
           | https://www.trinitydesktop.org
        
           | int_19h wrote:
           | And Cinnamon, which is modern Gnome beaten into some sensible
           | shape.
        
       | whalesalad wrote:
       | Insane how performant this is in the browser.
        
         | elbac wrote:
         | lol, I can't tell if you are serious or not, but it's a
         | recreation in HTML/CSS.
        
           | whalesalad wrote:
           | I just assumed it was wasm
        
         | bravetraveler wrote:
         | Dragging 'Word' is rough on my setup... while 'Notepad' is
         | fine, lol. More styling is expensive.
        
       | tux3 wrote:
       | This is a nice replication of the WinXP UI in JS (it is not a
       | virtual machine running in your browser).
       | 
       | https://docs.win32.run/
       | 
       | https://github.com/ducbao414/win32.run
        
         | rasengan wrote:
         | It is slightly more than just a UI since all of the
         | applications actually work (you can save and reload for example
         | and still see your previous files too).
         | 
         | It seems functional to me!
         | 
         | Kudos to the author!
        
           | jdougan wrote:
           | but not command.com
        
       | voidUpdate wrote:
       | I was hoping this was emulation, like the windows 95 in js that
       | exists, but its more of a simulator. The web browser doesnt work
       | and the minesweeper game uses a text emoji instead of a picture
       | for the face
        
         | jasperry wrote:
         | I also hoped it was actual emulation. I could tell it wasn't
         | when I saw the bootup progress bar moving more smoothly than it
         | ever did in real Windows :)
        
         | personalityson wrote:
         | I was able to create a vbs script (MsgBox "Test"), but it keeps
         | opening in Notepad...
        
         | philipwhiuk wrote:
         | Yeah I was gonna navigate to the website and try to recurse :(
        
         | LetsGetTechnicl wrote:
         | I was able to get the "browser" to work by opening the Flash
         | Player and clicking the link to the Ruffle website. It's just
         | an embedded view so some sites don't work (I think dependent on
         | your browser settings.)
        
           | sunaookami wrote:
           | Vast majority of sites disallow embedding nowadays.
        
         | twalichiewicz wrote:
         | Turns out you can just click and drag to select everything in
         | Minesweeper, and it reveals all the hidden numbers. There's
         | even a sneaky little "debug" text in the bottom-left corner
         | that shows where all the bombs are.
        
         | DustinBrett wrote:
         | Seems like v86 will be the king of this for a while longer.
        
       | pjmlp wrote:
       | Cool example, however yet another "runs best on IE" sites, ah
       | sorry it is Chrome nowadays.
        
         | simondotau wrote:
         | It must be using ActiveX, ah sorry I mean some feature that
         | Google has unilaterally decided is part of the official web
         | standard, soon to be known as the Chrome Platform standard.
        
       | mohamez wrote:
       | The bootup sound brought a flood of old memories.
        
       | ferguess_k wrote:
       | Both the OS and Word 2003 run smoothly. It's quite a show. I
       | think I might want to keep an old 16GB RAM laptop to run Windows
       | 7, MS Office 2010 and VS 2012. I'll cut off as much Internet as
       | possible and concentrate on my projects.
       | 
       |  _Edit_ : Just realized that this is not a VM, just a replicate.
       | No wonder Word 2003 looks weird.
        
         | accrual wrote:
         | It is still nice to use old versions of Office. I think 2003
         | was my favorite. Simple, usable, no usage-based UI, no pop-ups
         | like "look at this new feature we silently installed!" while
         | you're trying to write.
        
           | ferguess_k wrote:
           | Yeah 2003 is probably good enough for me too. I only need it
           | to write my CV.
        
           | gia_ferrari wrote:
           | On a whim a few years ago I wrote an engineering proposal on
           | my Pentium MMX using Word 2003. It opened within 2 seconds
           | via the aging hard disk. Today even LibreOffice feels a bit
           | overwrought. I've found AbiWord delightful recently - it's
           | the WordPad analog of LibreOffice.
        
       | gmaster1440 wrote:
       | No Pinball :(
        
         | zamadatix wrote:
         | Fear not! https://98.js.org/programs/pinball/space-cadet.html
        
           | HelloUsername wrote:
           | Also on web, Android and iOS:
           | https://ksylvestre.itch.io/space-cadet-pinball
        
           | kmarc wrote:
           | Oh my, thanks for this. Quickly made 1.5M
           | 
           | Used to spend lot of time when I was a kid (I didn't even see
           | a real pinball machine before)
        
         | accrual wrote:
         | _Pinball music plays in head..._
        
       | mmastrac wrote:
       | How can you tell that any Windows or Mac clone UI is a re-
       | implementation? Easy: try to move your mouse diagonally into the
       | Send To menu after letting it pop up. If the send-to menu closes
       | as you mouse over the item into the submenu, it's a clone. If the
       | menu stays up even if you brush over another menu item, it's
       | either real or a Good Clone. :)
       | 
       | For the fun history, @DonHopkins had a thread a few years back:
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17404345
        
         | wahnfrieden wrote:
         | Google has not learned this lesson
        
         | maplant wrote:
         | I could tell instantly in the loading screen because the three
         | blocks in the progress bar move smoothly across it.
        
           | jkingsman wrote:
           | Yup, and on just about every system I used there was a
           | stutter in it about 75% of the way through.
        
           | wibbily wrote:
           | Man nothing drives me further up the wall than when a nice
           | progress indicator with discrete segments gets animated with
           | a lazy `to { rotate(360deg); }` etc[1]. It is my molehill to
           | die on
           | 
           | [1] https://cdn.dribbble.com/userupload/41647820/file/origina
           | l-8...
        
             | metalliqaz wrote:
             | you just don't like how it looks, or is there something
             | else wrong with it?
        
               | AlecSchueler wrote:
               | It's just moving, it gives no actual indication of
               | progress.
        
               | metalliqaz wrote:
               | this reminds me of a tool at work that uses a progress
               | bar but the software doesn't calculate the job size so it
               | just fills up quickly and then goes back down again, and
               | repeats endlessly.
        
               | EvanAnderson wrote:
               | I don't have the time to research where I heard this, but
               | I recall a UI focus group study that found pretty much
               | equal user satisfaction between accurate linear progress
               | bars and random progress bars, but universal
               | dissatisfaction with progress bars that "reset". My own
               | feelings mirror this finding.
        
               | dotancohen wrote:
               | I called those Congress bars, con being the antonym of
               | pro.
        
               | saltcured wrote:
               | Back in the dark ages, "idiot dots" or "idiot marks" was
               | a phrase I heard for the various text terminal
               | equivalents.
               | 
               | It would cycle through a small number of text values with
               | some kind of backspace/overwrite to keep things localized
               | to where the cursor ought to be.
               | 
               | One version was a variable length ellipses: . .. ... that
               | would grow and reset in place.
               | 
               | Another was an expanding "dot": . o O that would cycle in
               | place as one character.
               | 
               | And the early "spinner" was: - \ | / that would cycle in
               | place as one character. Hmm, not sure this will render
               | properly on HN but it is hyphen, backslash, pipe, forward
               | slash.
        
             | CrimsonCape wrote:
             | You know talking about progress bars, it takes a lot of
             | confidence to program a linear progress bar. You think you
             | know when loading will be complete and think you know can
             | break down the incremental progress made during loading.
             | 
             | Instead we get these spinning wheels that are like "maybe
             | in the future this wheel will stop and we will have a
             | return value." No confidence whatsoever.
             | 
             | I know this is true because Apple tries to implement
             | progress bars in IOS like real chads. But their progress
             | bars are just fake. They are a cheap animation all the way
             | up to 90% and just stop moving until the progress is
             | actually complete which could be 5 seconds of 90% and 40
             | seconds of the last 10%. So they think they are chad but
             | lie.
        
               | rzzzt wrote:
               | There's also the "Achilles and the tortoise" solution
               | where the progress bar consumes the remaining 80% of
               | unclaimed space in each iteration.
        
               | bigstrat2003 wrote:
               | I would imagine that progress bars generally represent
               | the progression of the task state and not time, for that
               | very reason. Or is that not the case in practice?
        
               | int_19h wrote:
               | It is, but traditionally progress bars were often paired
               | with labels showing estimated remaining time.
               | 
               | That said, back in DOS era, this kind of thing was much
               | more straightforward because most operations that would
               | warrant a progress bar involved some kind of disk I/O,
               | which - if you amortize it - is fairly linear, so one can
               | estimate the completion time relatively well. In more
               | complicated cases - e.g. Win95 installer doing things
               | like hardware detection - those estimates were often
               | wildly off.
        
               | 01HNNWZ0MV43FF wrote:
               | I think the most common operations a user will see is
               | stuff like CRUD, which means you're waiting on a remote
               | database and a network round trip
               | 
               | Hard drives and networks are both so fast that you rarely
               | are waiting for data to stream, you're just waiting for
               | the stream to begin
        
           | nickt wrote:
           | Old, but good mandatory xkcd
           | 
           | https://xkcd.com/612/
        
         | DustinBrett wrote:
         | On my website daedalOS it does indeed have a delay when your
         | mouse leaves a sub menu. I didn't know people looked for that
         | though.
        
           | mmastrac wrote:
           | I believe that anyone who isn't explicitly looking for it is
           | subconsciously frustrated by the lack of it and they just
           | don't know why the UI is "annoying".
        
         | stronglikedan wrote:
         | If you have another option with a submenu on either side of
         | Send To, the Send To menu will close. It closes as soon as you
         | move over any item with a submenu. But it just so happens that
         | Send To is typically by itself, so it's a good test regardless.
        
         | jaffa2 wrote:
         | I must be a freak then because one of the first tweaks I do to
         | any Windows install since possibly Win98 days is to set menu
         | delay to 0ms. I like the snappy precise feel and have no
         | problems not taking shortcuts across menu items.
        
         | rayiner wrote:
         | Crazy how much UI still fails this test.
        
         | alnwlsn wrote:
         | There's something like this in every desktop Linux I've tried,
         | which made it feel like using the mouse was in some way weird
         | and broken. But I've been using it for long enough now that it
         | either got fixed, or more likely, I got used to it. I don't
         | even remember what it was, something about clicking drop down
         | menus a certain way?
         | 
         | Reminds me of the first time I ever used classic Macintosh
         | System OS, and how you have to hold the mouse button down to
         | keep menus open. It doesn't take much to throw everything off.
        
         | randunel wrote:
         | Ugh, all the links in that comment are dead, imgur and
         | microsoft alike :(
        
         | tczMUFlmoNk wrote:
         | A classic article about a no-delay solution to this problem,
         | not mentioned in the linked thread:
         | 
         | https://bjk5.com/post/44698559168/breaking-down-amazons-mega...
        
           | rao-v wrote:
           | Lovely and simple ... you'd think it would have become the
           | best practice in most libraries by now
        
         | webstrand wrote:
         | It also fails the "hold right click" test, Windows didn't
         | popover context menus until right click was released. Instead,
         | for file, it did a kind of "contextual drag and drop".
        
         | self_awareness wrote:
         | Padding of buttons and around text usually immediately tells
         | that it's a reimplementation.
        
         | OptionOfT wrote:
         | I love reading about old UI interface guidelines, and how much
         | research was done to make it useful to the user.
         | 
         | Now it's all about how to make it useful to the company.
         | 
         | <YOUR FILES ARE NOT BACKED UP, WOULD YOU LIKE TO TURN ON
         | ONEDRIVE?>
         | 
         | <Yes> <Maybe later>
         | 
         | Anyway, the links in that post have deteriorated.
         | 
         | Here's the link to Raymond Chen's blog:
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20190218080905/https://blogs.msd...
         | (shame on MS for redirecting you to another page when showing
         | you a 404, which make it harder to find the original URL).
         | 
         | Updated link to Raymond Chen's blog, where the comments have
         | been 'retired':
         | https://devblogs.microsoft.com/oldnewthing/20080619-00/?p=21...
         | 
         | And the 2 imgur links (same issue with the redirecting...):
         | 
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20230509182201/https://i.imgur.c...
         | 
         | and
         | 
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20230507201645/https://i.imgur.c...
        
           | jackero wrote:
           | There was an economies of scale back then with OS-level UI
           | components.
           | 
           | If Microsoft spent money on UX research that improved its UI
           | controls, it would benefit a lot of people. Essentially the
           | cost of that research was bore by all application developers.
           | 
           | The problem now? Every company is designing their own UI
           | components. Every company has to bear the cost of UX research
           | individually. It's a lot of wheel re-inventing. UX easily
           | takes a backseat.
        
           | MrGilbert wrote:
           | As a side note: With the Internet (and myself) getting older
           | and older, I appreciate the effort of the Internet Archive
           | more and more. So many links I was able to revive thanks to a
           | cached version. So many of my own works I was able to
           | retrieve. It's a blessing, and not praised enough.
           | 
           | (Only ignorant fools would start to fight it.)
        
         | SkidanovAlex wrote:
         | MS Paint though is "either real or a Good Clone :)", because
         | you can zoom to 12x by clicking one-pixel-wide line below 8x.
        
         | rahimnathwani wrote:
         | You can also right-click the desktop and choose 'Properties'.
         | If the resulting window has a tab called 'Screesaver', it's a
         | clone.
        
           | Kwpolska wrote:
           | Or you can look at the start button. If it has an uppercase
           | S, and the rest of the system is in English, it's a clone.
        
       | Catbert59 wrote:
       | Will call our IT support tomorrow and start this as a full
       | screen.
       | 
       | That will be fun in the office :-)
        
         | NitpickLawyer wrote:
         | That's actually not a bad April Fool's prank.
        
           | heraldgeezer wrote:
           | These are fun too - https://fakeupdate.net/
        
         | not_a_bot_4sho wrote:
         | Have an automatic defibrillator ready just in case
        
       | sergiotapia wrote:
       | Design peaked here for OS's. Perfect balance of colors and
       | functionality, and gloss. This was the top.
        
         | ianhawes wrote:
         | No, it's just nostalgic.
        
           | Fergusonb wrote:
           | I don't know, it's nice to have icons and buttons that
           | actually look like what they're going to do instead of
           | amorphous blobs.
        
           | silverquiet wrote:
           | I often have a hard time telling if I'm being nostalgic. For
           | me, 7 was peak Windows, but Win2K/XP would rank pretty close
           | as well. I suppose the question for me is what have
           | subsequent releases given us; what can we actually do with
           | more recent versions of Windows that we could not accomplish
           | back then?
        
             | LargoLasskhyfv wrote:
             | XP or 7 in "classic", aka 2000 look. For practical reasons,
             | like hardware-support, really working USB.
             | 
             | If running in some isolated VM for some superspecial APP
             | still supporting running on 2000, why not? Uses much less
             | memory.
        
               | int_19h wrote:
               | I was one of those people who stuck to classic theme all
               | the way up to Win7, but that was the version that finally
               | made me switch because the fancy default theme in it
               | actually looked pretty well after they made the glass
               | effects of Vista more subtle. WinXP looked like some kind
               | of cheap plastic horror in comparison.
               | 
               | It's very funny to look at Apple progressing from "looks
               | like Vista" to "looks like Win7" in its iOS 26 betas.
        
           | brandon272 wrote:
           | People love to dogmatically claim that any appreciation for
           | past design can only be chalked up to nostalgia but the XP
           | design is objectively an excellent balance between UI 'gloss'
           | and very simple and clear, unambiguous functionality.
           | 
           | People rarely complained that finding an application under
           | the Start menu was difficult. In current versions of Windows,
           | the Start menu is such a disaster, such a mess, that people
           | don't even open it and rely much more on the search function.
        
       | frozenseven wrote:
       | Playing Age of War right now.
        
       | sangeeth96 wrote:
       | Real thing is possible on https://copy.sh/v86/ I think but need
       | an XP disk image[1], not readily available at the moment
       | (probably for copyright reasons?).
       | 
       | [1]: https://github.com/copy/v86/issues/86
        
         | yakz wrote:
         | Windows 2000 in a JS VM is available:
         | https://bellard.org/jslinux/
        
           | zamadatix wrote:
           | Windows 2000 is also available in the above (with more pre-
           | installed apps).
        
         | int_19h wrote:
         | Better yet ditch the browser and get a proper emulator,
         | preferably one that emulates all the period-accurate hardware
         | such as https://86box.net.
        
       | benbristow wrote:
       | So close that Microsoft Edge's heuristics picked it up as a
       | potential scam after being used for a bit!
        
         | accrual wrote:
         | Wow, did you get some kind of notification in Edge? Maybe
         | they're trying to detect certain remote desktop sessions used
         | in scams or something.
        
           | benbristow wrote:
           | Yes. It's the new AI powered Scareware blocker.
           | 
           | https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2025/01/27/stand-up-
           | to-s...
        
           | netsharc wrote:
           | I've been on a Teams call with a dev colleague, who just
           | randomly clicked stuff and got web popups that were spoofing
           | the Windows 11 UI...
        
       | devnull3 wrote:
       | Win XP remains my favourite OS till date. I was in college and
       | getting hands on a pirated copy back then makes me so nostalgic.
       | 
       | There was a cambrian explosion of tools to customize the look and
       | feel. TweakXP pro is the one I remember. All pirated off-course.
        
         | dijit wrote:
         | I remember being extremely envious of the "Alienware theme"
         | that you could only get with an actual Alienware machine.
         | 
         | That was surprisingly short-lived though, such custom
         | experiences are uncommon these days. Seems like nobody is
         | theming Windows- they just fill it with crapware.
        
           | accrual wrote:
           | I remember those themes - the sleek "glowing" blue accents on
           | shiny silver and black UI elements looked so fancy back then.
           | There was a Windows Media Player skin too if I recall
           | correctly.
        
           | tracker1 wrote:
           | I preferred the Media Center Edition theme myself... kept a
           | copy of it for a long time to drop into XP and other windows
           | flavors.
        
           | zveyaeyv3sfye wrote:
           | > Seems like nobody is theming Windows
           | 
           | We found more fun in ricing our linux desktops :)
           | https://reddit.com/r/unixporn
        
             | frantathefranta wrote:
             | Specifically to look like Windows XP: https://www.reddit.co
             | m/r/unixporn/comments/pdd4o6/xfce_windo...
        
         | rayiner wrote:
         | How was it better than Win2K?
        
           | AlecSchueler wrote:
           | Lots of relatively small UI improvements that all added up. I
           | honestly never noticed them until years later when I had to
           | use a slightly older machine and had an "oh wow" moment.
        
           | devnull3 wrote:
           | For me the look and feel of Win XP was breath of fresh air
           | compared to Windows 98. WinXP was more user friendly and I
           | was not a power user back then.
        
           | carstenhag wrote:
           | It had Pinball, Solitaire and other games we never really
           | understood.
        
           | whobre wrote:
           | Multiple users on a same machine out of the box and way
           | faster boot time.
           | 
           | Didn't care for the UI, though - looked childish...
        
             | int_19h wrote:
             | Win2K did multiple users more or less the same, the only
             | difference I remember from XP is the login screen that
             | would list all accounts so you didn't have to type the
             | username.
             | 
             | As for UI, it was very easy to switch to classic mode.
        
               | whobre wrote:
               | > Win2K did multiple users more or less the same
               | 
               | No, it didn't. You had to use some 3rd party software for
               | that.
        
           | int_19h wrote:
           | Better hardware support.
           | 
           | Taskbar grouping.
           | 
           | ClearType.
           | 
           | Remote Desktop.
           | 
           | More games ran on it (mostly thanks to higher DirectX
           | version).
           | 
           | From developer perspective, XP was the first version of
           | Windows with registration-free COM and side-by-side
           | assemblies, which (if used properly by app devs) fully solved
           | the "DLL hell" problem.
        
         | floxy wrote:
         | OS/2 is the nostalgic one for me.
        
       | Mistletoe wrote:
       | Using this made me feel happy. I don't get that feeling from
       | modern Windows.
        
         | alex1138 wrote:
         | The 1990s were very Information Superhighway (I get that's said
         | in a mocking tone now for people who didn't actually know what
         | the internet was, but I tend to use it unironically)
         | 
         | It's just a shame about the antitrust stuff and the bugs and
         | glitches that came with MS Windows
        
       | ch_123 wrote:
       | I feel slightly ashamed that I spent enough time using Windows XP
       | that was able to spot that this was a clone based on the fonts
       | and shadow effects alone.
       | 
       | Nice effort though.
        
         | accrual wrote:
         | It could be a badge of honor! You used the system so much that
         | clones can't fool you. To be fair, Windows text rendering does
         | have a very specific look that's difficult to perfectly
         | replicate without using the actual Windows APIs.
         | 
         | I'm sure some here could look at a screenshot of the same text
         | rendered on Windows, macOS, and Linux and tell them apart.
        
       | jmkni wrote:
       | So disappointed it doesn't include OG solitaire!
        
       | easton wrote:
       | If you want the real thing:
       | https://lrusso.github.io/VirtualXP/VirtualXP.htm
       | 
       | (takes less memory than Miro, at least in Firefox :D)
        
         | jeffhuys wrote:
         | Works great! Tested on Orion. Sad to see I couldn't delete
         | system32.
        
         | autoexec wrote:
         | no spider.exe tho
        
         | ComputerGuru wrote:
         | Crashes the tab on iOS.
        
           | jeroenhd wrote:
           | Runs just fine on Firefox for Android. Display is stretched
           | to a weird resolution in portrait mode, though.
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | Back when the Start Menu made sense. It wasn't rose colored
       | glasses, it was functional.
        
         | accrual wrote:
         | Yep. No web search. No ads or news or weather or links to apps
         | that aren't actually installed. Opens virtually instantly. Lots
         | of stock customization options (icon size, icon order, pinned
         | icons, classic vs XP style, all shortcuts toggleable).
         | 
         | The only thing I miss is the search bar - I became quite used
         | to that with Windows 7.
        
         | sunaookami wrote:
         | The Windows XP start menu sucked, no search function and it was
         | common to have 3 columns full of shortcuts with folders inside
         | folders. It only got better with Windows Vista.
        
       | imafish wrote:
       | You cannot drag & drop the Recycle Bin :(
        
       | notpushkin wrote:
       | See also: https://www.windows93.net/
        
       | accrual wrote:
       | I am viewing this post on a real Windows XP system on a 440BX
       | platform from 1998. ;)
       | 
       | The BIOS splash text loads and animates but not much else. I'm
       | using Palemoon 25 (SSE1). Impressive that it loads at all!
        
         | freedomben wrote:
         | Sadly, accrual's system was just compromised so they're offline
         | for now
        
       | thecosmicfrog wrote:
       | "WIN32.RUN might have unexpected behaviors on browsers that are
       | NOT Chromium-based (Safari, Firefox, Internet Explorer, etc.)"
       | 
       | What would be the reasons this wouldn't run on Firefox? Genuine
       | question from a non-web developer.
        
         | tetris11 wrote:
         | it's not an emulator -- it's a (very realistic) re-
         | implementation of the desktop using standard JS and CSS. Flash
         | is run through Ruffle. Edge opens pages using native iframes.
         | 
         | Essentially the browser split comes from the usual browser
         | split: discrepancies in JS and CSS implementations
        
         | pjc50 wrote:
         | This means the developer hasn't tested it on Firefox. Platform
         | compatibility is way better than it used to be but you still
         | occasionally get differences in supported APIs or
         | interpretation of the standard.
        
         | BizarroLand wrote:
         | I ran it in icefox without an issue, even got a few games of
         | minesweeper in.
         | 
         | The only issue I had was the mobi reader wouldn't work, but
         | that was fine with me.
        
       | okincilleb wrote:
       | This is awesome! I recreated Win XP for my personal website a few
       | years ago (https://www.sohailsayed.com/), but this completely
       | blows it out the water on functionality.
       | 
       | I absolutely love just how much depth there is to the
       | functionality in this (from being able to use apps like word, or
       | being able to drag and move around icons on desktop).
       | 
       | Brilliant!
        
       | hard_times wrote:
       | We get these cheap recreations semi-regularly on here. Why does
       | stuff like this keep being spammed on here, besides the nostalgia
       | factor?
        
         | edgarvaldes wrote:
         | Maybe this is the "running Doom" of the UI/UX crowd.
        
           | int_19h wrote:
           | Of web UI in particular.
           | 
           | And this game is very old. I remember trying to get native-
           | looking dropdown menus in IE6.
        
         | alnwlsn wrote:
         | People have been making these for a while. I used to see them
         | on Flash game sites all the time as a kid. It'd be "Windows 96"
         | or "Windows XD" or whatever else they decided to call it. They
         | all had a start menu, notepad, maybe a calculator, and maybe a
         | Minesweeper clone, and not much else.
         | 
         | Judging by the amount of Windows startup sound compilation
         | videos out there, "the kids yearn for desktop UIs" might just
         | be a little more common than you think.
        
       | bityard wrote:
       | Not an authentic experience, it boots way too fast.
        
       | Davidzheng wrote:
       | wow it's one of the most nostalgic feelings I've ever felt. Like
       | coming back home after leaving for many years. And you still know
       | your way around even though you already forgot you knew.
        
       | godot wrote:
       | Little fun tidbit: I happen to use the WinXP wallpaper on my
       | Macbook (just for fun nostalgia, and because I like it), so when
       | I open this up on my browser the background blends:
       | https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/70a66a71-3f6a-485...
        
       | twwwt wrote:
       | Strangely enough, the first thing that some subconscious forces
       | brought me to was to listen to Beethoven's 9th symphony (the file
       | in media sub folder in the home folder).
       | 
       | Very well done...
        
       | jp1016 wrote:
       | This brings back so many memories I still remember having a cd
       | with the serial key written right on it. Even now, that key is
       | stuck in my mind qqwd7-8gr47-x9rcp-jjwh7-qpgqq
        
       | eimrine wrote:
       | Check margin/padding in filename input line of "save file as"
       | menu. Ms Word is totally not real Main menu font should be
       | monotype if I remember correctly Minesweeper has other fonts and
       | pictures Browser in browser can not work by some browser policy.
       | BTW the shot of nostalgy is MASSIVE My favorite video player from
       | that times was LightAlloy and Winamp 2.
        
       | dmpayton wrote:
       | I went through the "Install Windows" option just to hear the
       | Windows XP installation music again. That track is such a vibe, I
       | have loved it since I was a 14 year-old installing a pirated copy
       | of XP in 2001.
        
       | cactusplant7374 wrote:
       | Any support for Direct3D?
        
       | apatheticonion wrote:
       | God I miss Windows XP. I feel like, with a few small changes, the
       | Windows XP GUI would be the most solid desktop experience you
       | could possibly have.
       | 
       | Throw in POSIX compliance/bash, first party Linux compatibility
       | (not WSL), window snapping, dark mode, maybe a spotlight-like
       | search and a few enhancements to the file manager and you'd have
       | a pretty much perfect desktop/productivity OS.
       | 
       | Why can't we have nice things?
        
         | XorNot wrote:
         | Feels like you just want Cinnamon with maybe 1 or two more
         | polished features?
        
           | apatheticonion wrote:
           | I daily drive Linux and deeply appreciate the fact that
           | pretty much everything (at least in the DE space) is
           | developed for free by people donating their time - so don't
           | take this the wrong way.
           | 
           | ...but I've yet to experience the level of DE stability you
           | get from Windows XP/7
           | 
           | That also applies to Windows 11 (low bar, I know) and MacOS.
           | 
           | It is getting much better and that's happening very quickly -
           | but there is always some jank.
           | 
           | For instance, dragging a Chrome tab off the current window to
           | create a new window. The various file managers in Linux
           | (dolphin, files, thunar) fall short (also MacOS Finder is an
           | actual joke).
           | 
           | Also matching glibc versions when distributing software is a
           | bit tedious
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-08-07 23:00 UTC)