Oldest GUI application that still runs on Windows 11
129 points by enlyth 3 hours ago | 59 comments

drnick1 2 hours ago
I deplore the day we lost the menu bar and replaced it with "mobile first" designs. The desktop UI was perfected around the time of Windows 95 and has gotten worse with every iteration since then. That, and the increased reliance on non-native frameworks and libraries instead of working with directly with the Windows API in C.
reply
Grosvenor 55 seconds ago
The Desktop GUI was perfected with NeXTStep in 1990. Though some might say Smalltalk in 1984 (modulo some nice artwork and colours).

We could even have unified desktop.mobile codebases, with different GUI layouts. 280 North's objective-J/Cappuccino proved this.

IDK what we're even doing anymore.

reply
cowlevel 18 minutes ago
Android used to have a dedicated menu key that would always bring up a menu. It was removed to chase Apple's 100% screen design.
reply
frantathefranta 6 minutes ago
Just got nostalgic about the 4 hardware buttons on my Sony Xperia Play: back-home-context(option)-search.

Still the best navigable phone I had when coupled with the Nova Launcher gestures.

reply
okanat 18 minutes ago
Although I started with 98, I think Vista / 7 was the peak. It was user friendly enough for newbies but didn't sacrifice advanced controls. Just organized them better to bring focus to the more used parts.
reply
theandrewbailey 6 minutes ago
In terms of aesthetic, I love Windows 7-era Aero glass design (and to a lesser extent, Vista), but I also love the classic Windows 9x/2000 look. If I had to choose between the two, I'd go with Aero simply because of the start menu search bar.
reply
abhgh 8 minutes ago
I loved Windows Aero and the flip 3D view - the latter mostly because it looked so cool for that time!
reply
bcvvvy 49 minutes ago
I am fairly bothered about that but the one that really gets to me is the inconsistency of user interfaces across applications.

This precisely coincides with the web developers being allowed to wrap stuff into "apps" in Electron and the like.

reply
fellowniusmonk 16 minutes ago
I agree with you generally but I don't think desktop UI is remotely close to perfected. Unless you mean the desktop as a skeumorphic concept than maybe.

I think we've actually completely stagnate on the human interaction side of OSes and only emacs has made any progress and then only for those willing to put the work in, not as a vanilla user ui.

reply
dpark 47 minutes ago
> we lost the menu bar and replaced it with "mobile first" designs

What does this mean? I use lots of apps that still have a menu bar.

Some apps eschew it, like browsers, but not because they are “mobile first”, but because they are trying to maximize screen space.

reply
Narishma 19 minutes ago
> but because they are trying to maximize screen space

If that was the case they wouldn't put giant dead space margins around every UI element.

reply
excalibur 2 hours ago
> The desktop UI was perfected around the time of Windows 95 and has gotten worse with every iteration since then.

Well that can't be entirely true, the desktop experience on Windows 10 improved on Windows 8 by leaps and bounds.

reply
john01dav 32 minutes ago
> Well that can't be entirely true, the desktop experience on Windows 10 improved on Windows 8 by leaps and bounds.

In large part, windows 10's ui is more like that of windows 95 because it undid the changes away from the windows 95 paradigm that windows 8 did. Furthermore, those changes away from windows 95 in windows 8 were the exact kind of thing that might be called "mobile first".

reply
nubinetwork 3 minutes ago
Not until they settle on one control panel.
reply
MattPalmer1086 40 minutes ago
Haha, yes. It does not account for releases which made UX dramatically worse (win 8) which were then reverted to some extent.
reply
Borg3 37 minutes ago
Are you nuts? Or wait.. you must be Gen Z then, never really used Win95.. If so, you cant make any statements in the subject.

I still run Windows Classic GUI here, because its fast and confortable to use. Can you do better? Hmm, maybe. But im not conviced :)

reply
PorciiVorbesc 29 minutes ago
>Are you nuts? Or wait.. you must be Gen Z then, never really used Win95.. If so, you cant make any statements in the subject.

Super daft and somewhat insulting take. I started my computing journey with Windows 95, meaning I have plenty of experience and some emotional attachment to it and I'm as millenial with knee pain as they get not Gen-Z, and can't imagine using W95 today productively in a non-ironic way.

Windows 95 was perfect ... for what people did on computers in 1995, not for what I do now in 2026 on the HW of today. May W95 rest in peace, but I'll take my modern OS for my moderns entertainment and productivity tasks on modern HW. There's no way in hell I'd want to go back to W95. People calming otherwise have rose tinted glasses and only remember the good parts of that era without the downsides.

reply
Borg3 11 minutes ago
Can you tell me more? What are you doing that good old classic windows would be barely usable? Im really curious, because I was using corporate Win10 and hell, it was really driving me crazy. Good that there is Cygwin, so I could move most stuff there. Classic Windows just works, and if you care, you can even customize it.
reply
PorciiVorbesc 3 minutes ago
In modern WIndows, from 7 onward, I can hit the meta key and type the first letters of the app I want to open, hit enter and boom, it's opened. I can mouse snap the two app windows side by side on my large monitor. I have 125% scaling so things don't look tiny on my 4k monitor.

Win 95 had none of that. "Classic windows" makes sense if you also use it in a classic way, meaning one full screen app opened at a time, that's it, with the desktop being the center piece, not the browser.

reply
ChrisClark 3 minutes ago
Typical insulting boomer reply. Personal attacks, against the rules, and nothing useful added to the discussion. And the guy you insulted isn't even Gen Z...
reply
thesdev 29 minutes ago
I think they were referring to the latter part (downhill ever since) and not the former (win 95 is the best).

How are you running the classic GUI?

reply
Borg3 13 minutes ago
Im still running Win2003 here, hence classic GUI (Win2000 like). Works like a charm :) I do some hacking (programing, reverse engineering) and playing games (old of course) on it.
reply
theandrewbailey 13 minutes ago
I can't tell if this is sarcasm. Windows 8 is a very low bar in terms of desktop UI. It was universally panned as a regression.
reply
dofm 2 hours ago
> At the time of this post, that’s a 33 years and 8 months old application,

Pointing this out without a trigger warning is just rude ;-)

Some of us are older than we think, yo.

reply
suzzer99 3 minutes ago
I helped develop a web app used by major drug companies in 2001 that's still in use as far as I can tell. Marvel at the Dreamweaver-enabled design: https://resultview.q2labsolutions.com/resultview/logon/logon...
reply
capnjngl 2 hours ago
Speaking of FreeCell, a couple weeks ago I was visiting my 95yr-old grandmother and noticed she still plays oldschool FreeCell, specifically a variant that's really hard to track down now called FreeCell Pro [https://cards.fandom.com/wiki/FreeCell_Pro]

It inspired a weekend project. I always liked that you could swap the card backs in OG FreeCell and play with different "themed" decks, so I vibecoded something a little more modern. I got carried away and added a roguelite mode too (yeah I know how "Roguelite FreeCell" sounds). Anyway, it's free to play on the web, no ads: [https://freecellworlds.com/]

reply
ramses0 37 minutes ago
Solitaire's Journey: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solitaire%27s_Journey

Basically a 1992 rogue-lite where each room is a different solitaire game. eg: front parlor == clock solitaire, first bedroom == regular solitaire, upstairs is blocked by freecell, etc...

Screenshots: https://www.mobygames.com/game/1986/solitaires-journey/scree...

It's a fairly rich concept, you have a ton of different gameplay bound together by a very loose plot/quest mechanisms (eg: blue key == blue door ; boss == win 2 games of solitaire).

Definitely worth sharing if you've got some solitaire fans in your life!

reply
mijowi 2 hours ago
I often think old GUIs have a nice, functional look to them. This one is no exception. I notice (what I assume is) the shuffle toggle looks unfamiliar. This is from way back before that UI became a convention! I see the repeat icon has stuck around. So interesting!
reply
weinzierl 2 hours ago
Microsoft (and Apple) poured a ton of money into usability research in the early 90s and it showed. I vaguely remember the story through how many versions of the trash icon Microsoft went for Windows 95 to get it right.

For me it was a bit sad to see the mad and creative UX world of the homecomputer era being bulldozed over with the minimalist uniform results of the scientific usability research.

Little did I know that a mere quarter century later we are back were we once started and everyone as clueless as we were in the 90s goes overboard everywhere as if there was no tomorrow.

Yeah, and it sadly makes me miss the nicely ordered and easily usable world - I'm gettin' old I guess.

reply
elxr 2 hours ago
Functionality isn't hidden and buttons looked like buttons (instead of the modern trend of having unstyled text or tiny icons having a 50-50 chance of being a button).
reply
dawnerd 2 hours ago
The flat design trend really confused me. It really took off when high resolution screens started getting popular too, really made no sense. Wish we'd bring back Skeuomorphic design. Bring back that wood grain and metal textures. Bring back the fun UI's and app themes. Bring back real buttons!
reply
bluedino 2 hours ago
There are a couple versions of the Windows CD player here (along with other operating systems)

https://guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/cdplayer/

I always liked the look of the more complicated ones like this:

https://ctrl-alt-rees.com/2021-09-29-media-rack-download-win...

reply
quink 11 minutes ago
That's a year before the first PowerPC Mac even shipped.
reply
MisterTea 25 minutes ago
> And although using otvdm does feel like cheating, I thought it was cool enough to include in this post.

Honestly, if NTVDM was part of Windows then it seems fair to use it, even 3rd party clones.

reply
lolpanda 2 hours ago
In 2026 does it still make sense to build new Windows app using Win32 API? I was building a simple image viewer similar to QuickLook on Mac using Win32. I found it's very responsive. The code is less readable compared to React. For me Win32 is a good option if the UI state machine is simple enough.
reply
okanat 13 minutes ago
I think the sweet spot is WPF or actaully its FOSS version: AvaloniaUI. It is high level enough to be cross-platform and not stupidly verbose, however it is rather light pn resources. However, Win32 still wins in absolute minimalism.
reply
the__alchemist 60 minutes ago
I wouldn't, because I do not think we should put up barriers in our application between OSs (Nor have to maintain separate UI code bases for each OS you think might use it). So I use cross-platform kits. There are compromises, but I don't care about the looks native qualification compared to works anywhere. Yes, the software looks like an EGUI app (etc. Substitute Qt), instead of Looks native, but I appreciate how I'm not setting up barriers between OSs or making extra work.
reply
floydnoel 22 minutes ago
I couldn’t disagree more, when it comes to UIs. They should match the platform they are being used on. Cross-platform always produces a very sub-par experience. But us developers tend to care primarily about what makes development easiest for us.
reply
jen20 49 minutes ago
I also don't care how if things _look_ native, I care if the work like a native app. For example, on the rare occasions I touch Windows, I expect standard keyboard shortcuts to work. On macOS, I expect full integration with the accessibility frameworks and OS affordances like services.

A lowest common denominator idea of "everywhere" is just not that useful.

reply
chuckadams 31 minutes ago
Unless your name is Raymond Chen, you probably want to at least use ATL/MFC, which are frozen but still supported. Me, I'd take Qt any day, or wxWidgets if I wanted to go minimal.
reply
jim180 2 hours ago
I am having a blast with AI + C + WinAPI. The responsiveness of WinAPI is awesome
reply
toast0 35 minutes ago
I mean, if I was building a windows app, I would. Microsoft always tries to convince people to stop using it, but Win32 keeps working.

If Microsoft ever makes something that actually meets all the needs that Win32 addresses, they'll probably build a compat layer and a) your win32 code will still work in compat mode, b) that new thing may be worth targeting.

reply
userbinator 2 hours ago
Wrote a few small utilities in Win32 in the early 90s; still use them today unmodified, but most recently in WINE. I have some slightly older DOS utilities that are also quite usable.
reply
xacky 2 hours ago
There's probably an old X11 app from the 1980s that could be executed through xwayland somewhere.
reply
layer8 2 hours ago
As an unmodified binary from the 1980s on current Linux/Unix? Highly unlikely.
reply
ndiddy 51 minutes ago
From the article, the time to beat is November 16, 1992. This might be possible on one of the BSDs, as FreeBSD and NetBSD both document support for running a.out executables with the 4.3BSD ABI. I guess it would depend on whether anyone had ported X11 to run on a BSD on i386 before then. Alternatively, maybe you'd be able to get something running on SCO OpenServer (if you count that as a current OS, it IS still getting security patches). It documents support for XENIX x.out binaries ( https://www.scosales.com/ta/kb/126704.html ) so you might be able to run software compiled in the late 1980s for XENIX/386.
reply
spijdar 12 minutes ago
NetBSD has excellent binary compatible with 80s "unix", the problem is most (all?) of the 80s unix platforms it supports aren't x86.

Current NetBSD still has good support for running SunOS binaries, though, including graphical ones. I'm certain you could get a SunOS 4.x binary from pre-1992 to run on NetBSD/SPARC. I've no idea how far back you could potentially go on NetBSD/m68k -- probably quite a ways, especially if the binaries are statically linked. SunOS pre-1988 was all static linking!

(Running "real" 4.3BSD binaries might be hard -- I think NetBSD/VAX defaults to ULTRIX compat, which is an either/or thing versus strict Berkeley Unix compatibility. Same binary format, similar but incompatible syscalls/data structures.)

reply
jpablo 2 hours ago
I can't even run a binary from one Linux distro to the other, let alone one from a random Unix from the 80s. If a rebuild from source is allowed (which would need to allow modifications to the build system) that's a completely different game.
reply
dekhn 5 minutes ago
I've had static binaries on linux machines that worked across distributions for decades.
reply
xattt 2 hours ago

    > I can't even run a binary from one Linux distro to the other
Is this actually a thing?
reply
0x0203 48 minutes ago
Many programs are dynamically linked to at the very least, libc. If the system libc is older than what the binary was developed for, it will often fail. Failures going the other direction are less common, but can and do still happen. If the binary was statically linked with everything it needs, you've got a pretty good chance it'll work, but that's a bit harder to do with GUI programs that need to interact with X or Wayland.
reply
the__alchemist 57 minutes ago
It depends. I've found for example, if i compile on Ubuntu or Debian, it will probably work on any Ubuntu, Debian, or Debian-based distro released at or newer than the one I compiled it on. There are other cross-compatible examples.

More broadly, there are things like manylinux and MUSL which allow cross-distro applications.

reply
martijnvds 37 minutes ago
Containers fix this.

As long as the container bundles the right libc, the program should work.

reply
dvh 2 hours ago
Just used xev today (bought new mouse few days ago and it wasn't responding in chrome so I wanted to be sure).
reply
ModernMech 40 minutes ago
Related: "Chain of Fools : Upgrading through every version of windows (HQ)" (2011), they upgrade Windows 1 through to Windows 7, and demonstrate Doom II and Monkey Island working still at the end. Would be interesting to extend it to Windows 11.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPnehDhGa14

reply
jmclnx 2 hours ago
Interesting.

At one tine, Slackware Linux would not recompile binaries unless the program was patched. So there was a time you could find rather old binaries on Slackware, and maybe still on other distros.

I wonder what the oldest unchanged source/program running on Linux or BSD ? My vote goes to cat(1) :)

reply
toast0 28 minutes ago
FreeBSD /bin/cat has lots of recent changes of substance: https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/commits/main/bin/cat/...

Otoh, /usr/bin/true has only minor changes since initial import (1994) https://github.com/freebsd/freebsd-src/commits/main/usr.bin/...

/usr/bin/false is similar

reply