Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: WB 3.x uglier than WB1.x?  (Read 2729 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mikeymikeTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 3420
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
WB 3.x uglier than WB1.x?
« on: September 12, 2009, 11:16:01 AM »
I'm just wondering if I'm alone in thinking this, and perhaps it has to do with that I started on an A500 and a long time later got an A1200, but I think the default look for Workbench (say 1.2 or 1.3) looks better than WB 3.x.

For me it's the drab grey background and almost monochrome look to WB3.x by default, whereas the colour scheme picked for WB1.x looks quite cheerful.
 

Offline mikeymikeTopic starter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Nov 2002
  • Posts: 3420
  • Country: 00
    • Show all replies
Re: WB 3.x uglier than WB1.x?
« Reply #1 on: September 12, 2009, 06:03:16 PM »
Quote from: Tension;522827
Shirley you like the look of 3.9 better than 1.x?

Interlace me till i scream.


I haven't seen >3.1 in action at all.  I've seen OS4 running for about 5 minutes in Peterborough once.