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.
Thread beginning with comment 335910
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Two-sided approach
by siki_miki on Fri 31st Oct 2008 22:07 UTC
siki_miki
Member since:
2006-01-17

Vista does quite a few improvements under the hood, but MS somehow neglected importance of consistent and improved GUI (some parts were improved, but others, like sidebar, turned out to be annoying). Add to this early problems with drivers and performance, and people will lbe unsatisfied.

Windows 7 - here they try more to improve the GUI. Unfortunately they design it by looking at what people do mostly. Somehow I don't find it the best approach. If you see how TV got worse by just producing content that was the most popular, you will understand what I mean. If they are concentrating just on most common usage and neglect the rest, we will get UI that works well for most basic needs, but is severly limited (or even breaks apart) when you try to customize it for more advanced needs. Somehow I think Apple got this better and tend to adjust UI more after whan advanced users want - and therefore they got significant market share in academic circles, for example.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Two-sided approach
by Phloptical on Sun 2nd Nov 2008 15:23 in reply to "Two-sided approach"
Phloptical Member since:
2006-10-10

Somehow I think Apple got this better and tend to adjust UI more after whan advanced users want - and therefore they got significant market share in academic circles, for example.


Again, Apple can afford to do this because the amount of Mac users is a fraction of the amount of Windows users. And also, the typical Mac user isn't a 'button pusher', who uses a PC because he/she has to.

For the record, Microsoft is starting to adopt this philosophy, and I think it's wrong. Example: I like the ribbon interface, but I don't think they should have done away with the classic theme in Office 2007. Now my company is going to have to spend time and money in training users on the new interface, at the very least is loss of productivity. I don't care how much Microsoft "believes" in new UI decisions. You can't strand a whole subset of users like Apple does by not offering a choice of making things at least 'look' the way they did before. Also it impacts our upgrade cycle. We'll now have to support Office 2003 as well as the 2007 converter for who knows how long.

Reply Parent Score: 3