Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 31st Oct 2008 14:47 UTC
Windows Yes, we're still on the subject of Windows 7's user interface overhaul. We know what's going to change, we know what it looks like, but there's one important question that has not really been given much stage time: why? At PDC, one session was dedicated to just that question. Speaking is Chaitanya Sareen [.wmv], part of the windows user interface team. He'll place the changes in Windows 7 into context, talk about Windows' user interface history, and he'll explain why certain changes were made. An interesting insight into the goals of the Windows 7 interface.
Permalink for comment 335875
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

Actually, the reason for the "inconsistency of opinion" is simple. People don't just want change, they want and *improvement*. When Win95 came out, everything was different from Win 3.1, but people jumped on it precisely because the UI of Win95 was far superior to Win 3.1. When XP came out, people balked. XP was superior to W2K functionwise (after the first service pack), but XP was just change for the sake of change. People eventually got used to XP and the last W2K holdouts didn't have much choice once the W2K EOL (but they at least had "Classic mode"), so XP succeeded.

Vista failed because it was change for the sake of change, with no redeeming features other than glitz and bloat.

It's too early to tell about Windows 7. I personally haven't seen anything yet of value over XP other than change for the sake of change and a hardening of the commitment to "the one true way -- no compromises". But Windows 7 is still nowhere near release, so there's lots of time for Microsoft to surprise us. So I'll reserve judgement on whether Windows 7 is another Win95 or another WinME.

Reply Parent Score: 3