[HN Gopher] There are at least 10 different Microsoft design con...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       There are at least 10 different Microsoft design conventions in
       Windows 11
        
       Author : luke2m
       Score  : 132 points
       Date   : 2021-06-18 18:06 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (old.reddit.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (old.reddit.com)
        
       | paxys wrote:
       | 10 is a bit of a stretch. I only see 2-3 distinct styles.
        
       | rado wrote:
       | UI is a train wreck, but on the bright side, it has all that
       | sophisticated telemetry to improve the UX.
        
       | jbellis wrote:
       | Glass half full: that's some serious commitment to backwards
       | compatibility.
        
       | dm319 wrote:
       | I remember when Win 7 came out - even then it was so easy to
       | click through the veneer of the Win 7 style. I think it was the
       | 'display' dialogue, which looked almost identical to the Win98
       | version, complete with the CRT-style monitor. Likewise, Windows
       | 10 looks good with superficial use. Seems like each iteration
       | adds an extra shell.
        
         | solarkraft wrote:
         | This is great for people who already know it, but terrible for
         | people who don't and try to understand why there are 4
         | different panels for the same thing that all look different.
        
       | whalesalad wrote:
       | This is how it's been forever. Windows 10 is the same - the fact
       | that there are two control panels is mind boggling.
        
         | jasdine817 wrote:
         | Loads of third party apps have shell extensions that use
         | control panel and there's 20 years of settings to migrate over.
         | It's getting there.
        
       | wintermutestwin wrote:
       | I wonder if the software update dialog box will still feature the
       | useless flying dots instead of providing useful information like:
       | what update is actually doing (or more like trying to do but
       | failing), how much progress it has made in trying to do it (or,
       | more like where has the damn thing hung again) and (god forbid) a
       | solid guess as to how many fricking hours are left.
       | 
       | ~2T$ and these jokers can't figure out how to reasonably update
       | their kludgy mess.
       | 
       | (sorry for the rant, but this update crap killed a half a day of
       | my non-profit volunteer time and is still unresolved)
        
       | solarkraft wrote:
       | They've mastered the art of inconsistency. At least they're doing
       | _something_ to the previously hideous winforms widgets.
       | 
       | Bonus points had actually updated them to the new design language
       | (god fucking damn it).
        
       | wpdev_63 wrote:
       | Kinda wish microsoft would make Windows 10 the last backwards
       | compatible windows and start from scratch. Virtualize Win10 for
       | backwards compatibility and start from a blank slate with modern
       | design principles.
        
       | gentleman11 wrote:
       | Speaking of horrid design, Reddit is blocking me from viewing
       | that page unless I visit it in their app
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | dredmorbius wrote:
         | The article now points to old.reddit.com, which should not do
         | that.
        
       | banana_giraffe wrote:
       | The one that always gets me is how oddly forgotten the MMC stuff
       | is:
       | 
       | The Disk Management UI's bottom pane, for whatever reason, has
       | never worked with scroll wheels. It still gleefully ignores
       | scroll wheels.
       | 
       | The Hyper-V Manager .. a new thing .. has a broken UI as well.
       | It's "Actions" pane size is based off the screen-width, but the
       | default size of the window is based off the screen height, so on
       | ultra-wide screen monitors, a pane that should take up about a
       | 1/3 of the window, ends up covering about 2/3 of the window.
       | 
       | I also love how even the Action menu is a hold over from some
       | older UX ideas. There are two ways to bring up the help dialog
       | now in all of the MMC apps, either with the Help menu, or via the
       | Action menu.
       | 
       | But! At least they got enough attention to use Edge instead of
       | the default browser if you try to open the "TechCenter Website"
       | (a website that hasn't had that name in 8 years or so)
        
         | siproprio wrote:
         | Well... your problem is solved... disk management has no UI
         | anymore...
        
       | butz wrote:
       | That feeling, when you are still patching up lesser used
       | components for current design system and manager barges in with
       | new redesign.
        
       | allyourhorses wrote:
       | Moral: the UX "sector" needs to shrink by about 98%, and what
       | remains should be contractors or agencies
        
         | tvanantwerp wrote:
         | I've long suspected that there is a glut of not-terribly-good
         | UX people who continually create pointless redesigns to justify
         | their ongoing employment. I can't remember the last time (maybe
         | never?) that I saw a redesign and thought, "Oh, yes, that's so
         | much better, I'm excited for this!"
        
           | slightwinder wrote:
           | Maybe UX is a fashion-sector? As they also regulary reinvent
           | themself to stay alive.
        
             | nexuist wrote:
             | This is a good way to think of it. We've had clothes for
             | ages but they get _boring._ We seek different things that
             | look unique because we want to be excited. Our brains didn
             | 't like staring at text all day so we started wrapping the
             | text with fun colors and shapes and it spiraled from there.
        
       | caycep wrote:
       | I kind of wonder - maybe it's a sign of what a company like MS
       | is, and its strengths. i.e. they are focusing on being a good
       | platform/services company, and end user UI/UX is really more of
       | an afterthought for them. If somehow they end up with a good
       | Apple-like UI/UX, would that be a bad sign the company is losing
       | its focus or getting its culture muddled?
        
       | kushalpandya wrote:
       | In my years of using different operating systems, KDE Plasma has
       | had the most consistent UI across the board.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | The open source way of splitting out the actual utility into
         | some command line thing, and then making a thin UI wrapper,
         | seems to really improve consistency. Which, I guess, is
         | unsurprising -- the open source community needed to make a UI
         | on top of a chaotic ecosystem, so they actually had to deal
         | with the problem up front. Windows skated by accidental
         | consistency for quite a while.
        
         | solarkraft wrote:
         | Consistently ugly?
         | 
         | Breeze cleaned things up a bit, but almost all the apps have an
         | ,,I made the UI in 5 minutes before I fall asleep" vibe (namely
         | because the spacings are all weird).
         | 
         | To be fair: That is very consistent.
        
       | dredmorbius wrote:
       | I got my start programming with a tool that originated on
       | mainframes, saw a brief popularity in text-based minicomputers
       | (Vaxen and Unixen), was ported to X11 Unix, then to PCs beginning
       | with MS Windows 3, and through multiple generations as _that_
       | became the overwhelmingly dominant user platform.
       | 
       | There were further changes and inheretences from within each of
       | those environments as well.
       | 
       | It was possible when using the application to recognise where and
       | how various components and features originated and what
       | platform(s) they were developed on or for. Even some 50 years
       | after the first release, this can be determined.
       | 
       | As I came to use Unix and Linux more heavily, I noticed the same
       | trend in various applications, both command-line (GNU and BSD
       | userland, MVS JCL relics such as "dd", and others) and graphical.
       | Various X11 and graphical toolkits became instantly recognisable,
       | and though the appearances (and often feature locations and
       | implementations) were often wildly inconsistent (Xt Intrinsics /
       | Athena scrollbars, anyone?), _once the contexts were known, the
       | visual indicators made clear "oh, this is an Athena app, this is
       | a Motif app, this is a gtk app, this is a KDE app", or singletons
       | (Netscape / Mozilla / Phoenix / Fireox, StarOffice / OpenOffice /
       | NeoOffice / LibreOffice, Applixware (remember that?), etc. came
       | to be known quantities._ Various JS toolkits and Electron apps
       | are probably the current version of this.
       | 
       | I've (mostly in jest, though possibly more seriously with time)
       | had the tag "technological archaeologist" in various online bios.
       | That traces directly to my experience with tools developed over a
       | number of different platforms or tools. Or simply the influences
       | of time and trends or fashions.
       | 
       | Microsoft Windows at about 45 years of age now has its own design
       | legacy and archaeological strata.
        
       | spamizbad wrote:
       | Eh, UI consistency is overrated. I'm old enough to remember the
       | 90s and early 00s when people said the webapps would never really
       | be widely used outside of toy applications because of UI/UX
       | inconsistencies.
        
         | azornathogron wrote:
         | And instead, they are widely used and hated!
         | 
         | Businesses are great at iterating to find out just how much
         | customers are willing to put up with in quality reductions
         | before they actually leave, and also great at putting up
         | barriers to shift that tipping point further in the company's
         | favour. It turns out people will put up with _a lot_. Even
         | stuff they hate.
         | 
         | We have the technology and ability to create things that are
         | far higher quality, but it's usually a losing proposition from
         | a profit-seeking perspective.
         | 
         | It's just the same old "worse is better" story.
         | 
         | (This is just a tangential thought, not some kind of
         | disagreement or rebuttal.)
        
           | spamizbad wrote:
           | I don't find the the experiences of native desktop apps
           | particularly compelling. I think much of the thinking behind
           | this mentality grew from an era where computers were scary
           | and intimidating and you had huge swaths of the population
           | that didn't even want to use them. So everyone bent over
           | backwards trying to appeal to reluctant adopters. That world
           | doesn't exist anymore.
        
           | solarkraft wrote:
           | It's pretty sad, but unfortunately the exact reason why it
           | seems like everything we use is terrible. Executives at
           | companies don't care for the aforementioned reason, but they
           | discount the deep scorching branding damage this incurs that
           | no amount of marketing will fix.
           | 
           | Users who have the choice _will_ switch eventually, whenever
           | they get the chance, they will never come back and they will
           | hate you and share their discomfort. This will lead to scales
           | being tipped against you wherever possible.
           | 
           | Now, you can still build a hard to avoid product and make a
           | ton of money from it (Microsoft), so it's still not a losing
           | strategy.
           | 
           | So here I am just begging companies to stop building terrible
           | products because they make people miserable.
           | 
           | You can also build a high quality loved product and the
           | effect above will reverse, but probably not at the same price
           | (Apple, Jetbrains).
        
         | jrm4 wrote:
         | This entire field of so-called *design" is WILDLY overrated.
         | The biggest problem is that there is way too much mere fashion
         | masquerading as "scientifically proven methodologies of human
         | interaction with machines." There's so much ridiculousness in
         | this space because "designers" treat their own preferences (or
         | worse, those of their company) as nearly immutable laws. Just
         | let me pick poofy or flat buttons and get over yourselves.
        
           | lioeters wrote:
           | I'm inclined to agree. I'm always wary of design
           | refresh/update in operating systems and commonly used
           | applications like Firefox, because more often than not, it
           | means worse user experience and no perceptible benefit.
           | 
           | Your whole comment also rings true when "design" and
           | "designers" are replaced with "software" and "programmers".
        
           | lotsofpulp wrote:
           | How about let me have text on my buttons so I know what the
           | hell they are for. And I can communicate to my parents what
           | the hell they should be clicking on. And stop hiding every
           | single button.
           | 
           | I am specifically referring to Google.
        
       | vehemenz wrote:
       | Don't forget applications that still use a forked version of the
       | Windows 3.1 common dialog.
       | 
       | To be fair, the last consistent Windows UI was probably Windows
       | 3.1. In hindsight, it looks is incredibly cohesive and
       | functional. Swap out the font (MS Sans Serif, especially bold,
       | looks pretty bad), make the graphical components vector-based,
       | and it would still look great today.
        
         | allyourhorses wrote:
         | Windows 3.1 had something like 5 built-in widgets. CTL3D.DLL
         | (dating myself here!) IIRC added a bunch more. IMHO somewhere
         | between CTL3D and XP was when design topped out.
         | 
         | I still love elements of 7 and 10, but honestly would have been
         | totally fine if 2K or XP were the final themes. Imagine if
         | after all this time, the only way to date a Windows
         | installation was by subtle design variations of the window
         | title bar. Such bliss! Although of course, I am glad for many
         | of the changes made during the mobile/touch revolution.
         | 
         | I wonder if the tide will ever turn on UX ideologists. Chased
         | out of the industry like the witches and warlocks they are :)
        
       | okareaman wrote:
       | I have a feeling the only people who care about this are people
       | who don't use Windows.
        
         | slightwinder wrote:
         | I do use windows. And it does annoye me how inconsistent it is.
         | And I also use Linux, which is inconsistent by design. Yet
         | windows is even worse than this IMHO.
        
           | okareaman wrote:
           | I like how the tabbed dialog to set the system path env vars
           | is the same for 20 years, then if I open up the calculator
           | and it's got a fancy new look and feel, that's good too.
        
       | olivierestsage wrote:
       | Although my favorite is Win32, Modern/Fluent is the only one that
       | really strikes me as "bad."
        
         | rado wrote:
         | That's the funniest part: the oldest style is still the best.
        
           | mschuster91 wrote:
           | Because back then usability was in focus:
           | https://socket3.wordpress.com/2018/02/03/designing-
           | windows-9...
           | 
           | There is also a Twitter thread that notes what got lost over
           | time - especially separation and contrast.
           | https://twitter.com/tuomassalo/status/978717292023500805
        
             | ziml77 wrote:
             | I'm glad Windows still has a high contrast mode for the
             | people who really need it to see things, but I so wish that
             | designers everywhere would think much more about keeping
             | good contrast. They're all working on high-end monitors in
             | ideal conditions, all nicely color calibrated. But that's
             | not normal. TN panels are still very popular. On those,
             | elements displayed on screen very easily lose contrast when
             | looking at them at an angle. I have a sub-optimal
             | positioning right now on a TN panel where the center is
             | lined up with my eyes and looks good, but if I look to the
             | top of the panel, everything is darker than it should be.
        
               | timw4mail wrote:
               | You're thinking of a TN panel. VA panels can be nearly as
               | good as IPS in terms of viewing angles.
        
               | ziml77 wrote:
               | You're right. I always get TN and VA mixed up. I'll edit
               | that.
        
               | nitrogen wrote:
               | _TN panels are still very popular. On those, elements
               | displayed on screen very easily lose contrast when
               | looking at them at an angle._
               | 
               | Back when ads were actually a different background color
               | on Google, I suspect they A/B tested background colors
               | right up to the point that they disappeared on cheap TN
               | laptops. I experienced this first hand when helping a
               | friend with their laptop 5-10 years ago, and they clicked
               | on an ad by mistake. Turned out that the ad background
               | turned white at normal laptop viewing angles.
        
         | smoldesu wrote:
         | You'd probably like GTK/QT. Both of them are effectively
         | delineations of that same functional design language, with
         | holistically different approaches to the subject. I personally
         | love both, but they're a fascinating case study if nothing
         | else.
        
           | olivierestsage wrote:
           | Yes, I certainly do -- especially Qt.
           | 
           | I'm always wondering whether my preference for this more
           | "traditional" design paradigm just comes from using Win32 in
           | my formative years or some objective difference of quality.
           | 
           | Anyone who shares the sentiment might want to check out the
           | Chicago95 theme[1].
           | 
           | [1] https://github.com/grassmunk/Chicago95
        
             | dm319 wrote:
             | I think they were quite efficient designs. I grew up using
             | a lot of paradigms, from 3.1, 95, RiscOS, Workbench and
             | dabble of Mac 9/10 later on. I gave gnome 3 a good go, but
             | while I really enjoyed the visual appeal of it, I found I
             | wasn't as productive - trying to switch Windows was hard as
             | the windows didn't stay in the same place like they did
             | with a taskbar. Unity was more productive for me. But I'm
             | happiest on MATE.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | udev wrote:
       | Yes, and you need about 12 digits to write the net worth of Bill
       | Gates, which is to say this does not matter as much as you think.
        
         | udev wrote:
         | Downvotes from people who can't accept that one can dominate a
         | market with many inconsistencies in your UI?
         | 
         | I guess the same people who applaud each time when Federighi
         | anounces the redesign of the macOS trashcan icon.
        
       | arthurcolle wrote:
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/Windows11/comments/o2a0kp/there_are...
        
         | abalaji wrote:
         | @dang can we update the link, on mobile you can't even view the
         | thread (Reddit pop up)
        
           | dt3ft wrote:
           | I second this. I don't have the reddit app and will not
           | install it to view this link. Might as well remove it from HN
           | altogether.
        
       | 015a wrote:
       | I understand it can be fun to point stuff out like this, laugh at
       | it, etc.
       | 
       | Personally, I think this is actually good. Consistent and
       | Productive Design, especially on the level of patterns across an
       | entire operating system of both first and third party
       | applications, is an insanely difficult problem. This means one
       | absolutely needs to bring in the consideration of resource
       | allocation. Its not possible to do everything exactly the same;
       | in fact, a related but incorrect argument may be that its not
       | possible to do everything exactly the same on Day 1, but because
       | "Good Design" is a moving target, its actually really difficult
       | to reach that goal in any capacity whatsoever.
       | 
       | Inconsistent design, like this, tells me that it isn't a resource
       | allocation priority for Microsoft. Thus, those resources are most
       | likely diverted to more functional aspects; getting it working,
       | faster, more consistent behavior, broader and deeper feature
       | sets, etc.
       | 
       | This is the right trade-off for Windows. One can point to MacOS
       | or iOS and see a much more consistent design language across
       | first-party apps, as well as pretty strong adoption of this
       | design language across third-party apps, but the cost of this
       | near-perfection is abstracted away. Its easy to see
       | inconsistencies in design; its much harder to speak in aggregates
       | about obscure software issues, missing features, delayed
       | releases, etc. Strongly consistent design, in the face of these
       | issues (many of which are unproveable externally) may actually be
       | the right trade-off for MacOS and iOS; Apple is a far more
       | design/PR/marketing driven company, and this guise of "everything
       | is engineered and under control" may actually be materially
       | important for their brand.
       | 
       | Windows is different. Moreover; it _should_ be different. The
       | fundamental idea that an entire operating system needs a
       | cohesive, strongly consistent design language is one that
       | Microsoft has tried to push several times, but one which hasn 't
       | even seen internal adoption, let alone external. One can blame
       | this on the design languages being bad, or their tooling being
       | bad, or anything, but at the end of the day its still the most
       | popular non-server OS in the world (or is Android bigger now?
       | Well, its the same argument there too). Conforming to any central
       | design pattern isn't a priority for Windows users. There's no
       | physical law of the universe that OS-wide design languages are a
       | naturally good thing; in fact, I would argue that design
       | languages shared between many domains of applications may
       | fundamentally fail to account for the wide variety of interaction
       | patterns within every domain, and thus as a software platform
       | increases its complexity of services offered, domain-agnostic
       | design languages naturally begin to fall apart. They may actually
       | be Generally Bad, though I only feel comfortable asserting with
       | any certainty that they're probably not Generally Good or Bad,
       | and there's room for different platforms to try different things.
        
       | ziml77 wrote:
       | I hate the inconsistencies, but this is a bit of an extreme
       | breakdown.
       | 
       | The ones marked as 95, NT, and XP are all fit with each other.
       | Vista and 7 also go together fine, and with the UI theming still
       | don't look inconsistent with the previous set.
       | 
       | The one marked as 8 looks right at home with 11 (which was really
       | just a matter of giving it blurred transparency and rounded
       | corners).
       | 
       | Splitting 10 RTM and the Store is weird. They very much go
       | together.
       | 
       | That leaves 10 19H1 which is the biggest oddball to me and
       | hopefully gets fixed to be consistent with 11.
       | 
       | But anyway, isn't it better that they haven't fucked with some of
       | the older (95-7) UIs that your normal user is never going to see?
       | (I'm counting add/remove programs in that set since there is a
       | non-.cpl replacement that is modernized) Power users tend to hate
       | it when things get changed for no reason other than aesthetics,
       | especially since they often lose functionality.
        
         | grishka wrote:
         | The Microsoft's insistence on maintaining native backwards
         | compatibility with software some of which is as old as me is so
         | perplexing.
         | 
         | I saw what the API of the classic Mac OS looked like[1] the
         | other day, and it does resemble WinAPI very much. It's
         | procedural, many functions take descriptors, many other
         | functions take structs you allocate and fill in, there's a DIY
         | event loop, and so on. It even has a windows.h (lol). Apple got
         | rid of this in 2000. It then provided a VM-style "classic
         | environment" backwards compatibility layer in OS X for ~5
         | years, and Carbon library for source-level compatibility for
         | even longer.
         | 
         | Apple did manage to pull this off. Why can't Microsoft do the
         | same? Why can't they put a seamlessly integrated 95/XP/whatever
         | VM into their system that would launch when you run a win32
         | application, and finally give themselves the freedom to rewrite
         | everything from scratch, with more sensible APIs and in a more
         | memory-safe language?
         | 
         | [1] https://github.com/cy384/ssheven/blob/master/ssheven.c
        
         | slownews45 wrote:
         | I'm not even sure why they migrated settings to settings -
         | control panel remains much more direct and explicit.
        
           | userbinator wrote:
           | Because it's not your computer to control anymore?
           | 
           | It reminds me of when My Computer was renamed to This PC, and
           | My Documents became Documents --- a subtle way to say it's
           | not yours.
           | 
           | The latest anti user trend is of course that of referring to
           | computers as "devices".
        
             | jaywalk wrote:
             | Yeah... I think you might be reading just a _little_ too
             | much into the new names.
        
               | jimmygrapes wrote:
               | Perhaps, but I've sat in design meetings for a very
               | similar concept: the original product was something
               | similar to "My Pass" and there was well over an hour of a
               | dozen people discussing the psychological effects
               | changing it to something closer to "[Brand] Pass" - the
               | biggest one being that exact transition of ownership. The
               | overwhelming majority agreed that removing the sense of
               | individual ownership implied by "My" would both encourage
               | sharing (in this case it was reasonable to do this as an
               | "upgrade") and to encourage brand loyalty. I suggested
               | "My [Brand] Pass" but was roundly shot down as "that just
               | complicated things". Surveys were performed (NB: I do not
               | know what these surveys contained or how they were
               | handled) and eventually it was decided to call it
               | something like "Family Pass".
               | 
               | Point being that name changes _can_ come from such over
               | thinking.
        
         | bee_rider wrote:
         | In the image, they've provided colored boxes around the
         | different types, that seem to match your breakdown pretty well.
         | (so, 95, NT, and XP are teal in the image). I guess for the
         | post title, the more dramatic count was used.
        
         | wlesieutre wrote:
         | It also leaves out the Windows 3.1
         | 
         | https://i.redd.it/5xo6c8xmst571.png
        
           | ziml77 wrote:
           | Ok, that's the absolute worst. I hate running into those 3.1
           | file pickers because they're so annoying to navigate.
        
             | kwanbix wrote:
             | Horrible? Sure. But difficult to navigate? I am not so
             | sure. Maybe because I used Win 3.x and 9x? Could be.
        
               | nwallin wrote:
               | If I recall correctly, the 3.1 file picker isn't
               | resizable. And it's very small. The small size wasn't
               | such a problem when the filesystem enforced 8.3 file name
               | lengths, but these days it's reasonable to expect names
               | for individual files or folders to be much longer than
               | that.
               | 
               | We have a bug in our backlog right now because we tack on
               | an extra bit when we export files. Imagine we open
               | foobar.raw and export foobar.txt and foobar.txt.info. But
               | when the application tried to write out foobar.txt.info
               | it hits the 260 character limit in NTFS. Meaning that the
               | original file name was over 255 characters.
        
               | rbanffy wrote:
               | > And it's very small
               | 
               | It was designed to work on a VGA screen with 480x640
               | pixels after all.
               | 
               | And this is from Windows NT 3.5 IIRC. Windows 3.1 didn't
               | have long file names (like the Apple II had in 1979 or
               | so).
        
               | ziml77 wrote:
               | Yes, difficult to navigate. The list can only display a
               | few items at a time because it's so small. And really I
               | don't want to be clicking my way to a folder anyway, I
               | want to be able to paste the path in or type it with
               | autocomplete.
               | 
               | I grew up with 3.1 and 9x. I don't want that back.
        
           | vehemenz wrote:
           | I was looking for one of these, but I could only find Win31
           | common dialogs in third-party (non-Microsoft) applications.
           | Well done.
        
         | ska wrote:
         | > The ones marked as 95, NT, and XP are all fit with each
         | other.
         | 
         | They aren't really though. Aesthetically they are reasonably
         | close but employ different conventions (e.g. the list/tree in
         | win32 and the list in NT4 display the same kind of information
         | but different ways, and with different icons).
         | 
         | Consistency is a pretty fundamental thing in interface design,
         | and whether or not something "fits" aesthetically is only a
         | small part of all this, which I think was OP's point.
        
         | jiofih wrote:
         | > that your normal user is never going to see
         | 
         | You underestimate the amount of ducking around a normal user
         | has to do to keep windows happy over the years.
        
           | cronix wrote:
           | I have to do the same with my mom and her mac every week or
           | two. The latest was all of the flash deprecation warnings and
           | she uses flash routinely for puzzle games although she's
           | never heard of this "flash" thing. I spend about as much time
           | getting her mac fixed as I used to her windows computer and
           | she's been using computers since the 80s. Remember, we're
           | talking about "normal users," not us on HN. Most normal users
           | don't know 90% of their computer. They know how to turn it on
           | and do what they did yesterday, and if that doesn't work any
           | longer they are mostly lost. Kind of like cars. Most know how
           | to drive them and gas them up, but if there is ever any other
           | sort of issue that isn't obvious like a flat tire they are
           | lost. That's most "normal" users. There's a reason why "did
           | you _simply_ try turning it off and on again " is a meme,
           | because that's most people.
        
             | setr wrote:
             | > There's a reason why "did you simply try turning it off
             | and on again" is a meme, because that's most people.
             | 
             | Well, that and the fact that it actually does the trick 90%
             | of the time, which is fairly stupid to begin.
             | 
             | Troubleshooting Windows is largely an exercise in futility
             | to begin with; turning it off and on again is usually the
             | only thing that even IT people can reasonably do (that, and
             | google the error to find out about turning on/off _this
             | specific thing_ )
        
       | rbanffy wrote:
       | > I think 11 will be a true return to a Microsoft experience
       | supremacy not seen in a decade.
       | 
       | I'm sorry. I had to laugh.
       | 
       | Windows has been so complicated and inconsistent, with built-in
       | control panels, vendor mini-applications, inconsistent within
       | Windows itself, where you see the parts that haven't been touched
       | since NT 3.5, alongside each and every version of Windows ever
       | sold, plus the built in vendor specific control panels that makes
       | it impossible to figure out what is the currently active Wi-Fi
       | configuration (a recurrent problem I have when helping house
       | guests to connect. Macs just work. Linux just works, Androids and
       | iPhones easily connect. Windows laptops? Ha! Just use the range
       | extender that's in the guest bedroom. For some reason I will not
       | dedicate the time to figure out for every Windows version and PC
       | manufacturer why, that little thing seems to like Windows
       | machines.
        
         | kiwih wrote:
         | I'll agree that Macs have it pretty good, but to say 'Linux
         | just works' with WiFi is a bold statement. Some Linux
         | distributions work well, but when you have to fall back to the
         | command prompt to do something as simple as connect to an
         | enterprise WiFi network for a device as common as a raspberry
         | pi [0] because there is no GUI, well. I'll grant that at least
         | the steps are moderately consistent. Anecdotally, even on my
         | Ubuntu laptop, at least once a year I lose WiFi and have to
         | delve into some online forums to learn what just broke it.
         | 
         | I use both Linux (Ubuntu/Raspian) and Windows extensively and
         | overall most things just work better on Windows, poor design
         | philosophies aside.
         | 
         | [0] https://iceburn.medium.com/raspberry-pi-connected-to-wifi-
         | of...
        
           | jimmygrapes wrote:
           | I installed Ubuntu Server 20.04 on a spare laptop. Long story
           | short, it did not have any way to connect to my WiFi network
           | unless I either first went through the guided installation
           | with an Ethernet cord attached, or went through some
           | excruciating troubleshooting steps involving setting up
           | hardware via obtuse CLI commands and arguments. I tried the
           | latter just to see if I could without looking things up on my
           | phone/separate computer, and even with a bit of cheating I
           | still gave up and tried again with the cord plugged in.
        
       | jasonlfunk wrote:
       | Is it just me, or can this Reddit post not even be viewed with
       | iOS Safari? I understand that Reddit wants me to download their
       | app, but to prevent me from even seeing the post is a step too
       | far.
        
         | mikelward wrote:
         | Can't view it in Duck Duck Go browser on Android either. Reddit
         | forces me to either download the app or go to /r/popular.
        
         | janci wrote:
         | old.reddit.com for the win
         | 
         | (just change www. to old. or i. for mobile layout)
        
         | mulmen wrote:
         | https://old.reddit.com/r/Windows11/comments/o2a0kp/there_are...
        
         | AstaManasta wrote:
         | It's pathetic. You can request the desktop version though which
         | works fine in landscape mode
        
         | olivierestsage wrote:
         | What stopped me was having to click "View rest of discussion"
         | to read a full comment thread. When I clicked it, it didn't
         | show me the discussion, but instead took me to a window with
         | another submission from r/Windows11 in focus. I had to scroll
         | back up to actually find the discussion. Good grief!
         | 
         | Edit: I meant "Continue this thread," not "View rest of
         | discussion."
        
           | rideontime wrote:
           | Try to view too many comments and it'll force you to log in,
           | too. At which point I just close the tab, remembering that
           | I've never read anything in a reddit thread that was worth
           | the time it takes to log in.
        
             | keanebean86 wrote:
             | There's also the NSFW thing too. If you try to view post in
             | specific subreddits it will try to force you to the app.
             | These aren't even smut subreddits. I think /r/greentext
             | (4chat story screenshots) does this. I really need to
             | finally leave.
        
           | finiteseries wrote:
           | No, that's "normal" and has been there for a while.
           | 
           | This post forces you to use the app to see any of it period,
           | or returns you to /r/popular. First time I've ever seen it as
           | well.
           | 
           | https://imgur.com/a/IFI9ik9
        
         | btdmaster wrote:
         | See also https://teddit.net.
        
         | conradfr wrote:
         | Most days I can't view Facebook or Instagram content because I
         | don't have an account, I only get a login page.
         | 
         | I guess this is a trend. I wonder if it's affecting
         | influencers' business.
        
           | edgeform wrote:
           | Instagram walked back the forced-login-to-view-page change
           | 2-3 weeks ago, and within the last couple days put it back
           | on.
           | 
           | Guess I don't get to see Instagram pages anymore. Sad thing
           | is many small businesses use Instagram for their "website",
           | there's a few around me that I haven't checked out because I
           | can't see their "website" on Instagram.
           | 
           | > I wonder if it's affecting influencers' business.
           | 
           | HN is a self-selecting bunch. The vast, vast majority of
           | people that care about influencers are logged in all the time
           | anyway.
        
       | 51Cards wrote:
       | As an older developer I find it funny how design trends cycle
       | around. I think in my life I've seen UI design go the full circle
       | at least twice. The square corner, solid colour era is ending and
       | it looks like we're pulling back into round corner and gradient
       | land. Next stop, Skeuomorph station, all aboard.
       | 
       | Upside, some of the legacy systems I wrote 20 years ago are going
       | to look modern again!
        
       | aksss wrote:
       | I'm really disappointed in the center-justification of the task
       | bar and start menu. I'm assuming that means the start menu icon
       | will forever be creeping left as I open more apps, along with the
       | start menu itself. Not a fan of this at all. There's an option to
       | left-justify, I understand - and I like options - but would
       | prefer left-justified to remain the default for users.
       | 
       | I assume they're building in the option to left-justify in case
       | this move turns out to be another Windows 8 cock-up of a UI
       | experience. I remember MS executives being "excited" about
       | Windows 8 as well, it means little to nothing to me that Satya is
       | excited about Win11.
        
         | spidersouris wrote:
         | A mere hypothesis, but I wonder if that task bar centering
         | wasn't pushed because of the increase in popularity of
         | ultrawide screens as well as tablets (Microsoft has been
         | pushing for Windows use on tablets for quite some time now).
         | Because when you imagine a centered taskbar on an ultrawide
         | screen or a tablet, it makes absolute sense and is preferable
         | to having it on the left side of the screen. The centered
         | taskbar doesn't work at all on smaller screens though.
        
           | leokennis wrote:
           | Huge advantage of the start button on the bottom left: I can
           | just "throw" my mouse pointer as far down and left as I can
           | and click, and I'll always hit the start button.
        
             | arkitaip wrote:
             | This is actual supported by Fitts' law, one of the very few
             | laws in UX design [0]:
             | 
             | "Placing layout elements on the four edges of the screen
             | allows for infinitely large targets in one dimension and
             | therefore present ideal scenarios. As the user's pointer
             | will always stop at the edge, they can move the mouse with
             | the greatest possible speed and still hit the target. The
             | target area is effectively infinitely long along the
             | movement axis. Therefore, this guideline is called "Rule of
             | the infinite edges". The use of this rule can be seen for
             | example in MacOS, which places the menu bar always on the
             | top left edge of the screen instead of the current
             | program's windowframe."
             | 
             | [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitts%27s_law#Implication
             | s_for...
        
       | pavlov wrote:
       | Seems like some progress has been made because the oldest style
       | here is as recent as Win95.
       | 
       | For a long time, the "Install Font" dialog was unchanged from
       | Windows 3.0, with a tiny little folder tree view meant for 8.3
       | character file names and a drive picker button...
       | 
       | Some googling reveals they cleaned these up around 2015:
       | https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/09/windo...
        
       | slownews45 wrote:
       | Talking to modern UI / Designer folks for these things - so much
       | mushy weird aspirational language and constructs.
       | 
       | What happened to this will be easier to see, to remember, takes
       | fewer clicks, is quicker.
       | 
       | I mean, you spend a billion bucks on a new design and get things
       | like this (from MS Fluent):
       | 
       | Fluent experiences listen and adapt... They unite people and
       | ideas, whether they're on opposite sides of the globe or standing
       | right next to each other... Fluent speaks in light and shadow, in
       | spatial dimensions...
       | 
       | I just want to get work done. Save me from my spatial dimensions
       | (and whitespace overload).
        
         | dntrkv wrote:
         | You're just looking at the marketing speak from the new design
         | language.
         | 
         | When thinking about design systems, there are few different
         | levels and you speak about different ones depending on who you
         | are talking to. For me it breaks down something like this,
         | going from high-level to low-level:
         | 
         | Design Philosophy - Marketing (what you posted)
         | 
         | Design Principles - Designers / UX (accessible, minimal,
         | emotion)
         | 
         | Design Language - Designers / UX (red is used to denote danger)
         | 
         | Design Library - Designers / UX / Engineers (ButtonPrimary
         | color = blue, ButtonDanger color = red)
         | 
         | Design Implementation - Engineers
         | (<ButtonDanger>Cancel</ButtonDanger>)
        
         | kungito wrote:
         | I'm no designer but I've seen amazing ones work. Could it be
         | that this is just marketing talk unrelated to actual design
         | philosophy underneath because it is not targeting people
         | related to that?
        
           | slownews45 wrote:
           | But the modern interfaces are relative junk from my view with
           | some exceptions.
           | 
           | Just basic things like putting focus on an input field of a
           | pop-up dialog. I get that isn't sexy but it IS efficient.
           | They should focus more on the later and less on the sexy
           | gradient / look stuff.
        
             | sixothree wrote:
             | This may seem crazy but that was one of the major
             | accomplishments of the google.com search page. Before that
             | when you navigated to a search engine, you still had to
             | click the search box. The cursor was not located in the box
             | for you.
        
         | siproprio wrote:
         | The trick is, these newer UWP apps, they all take fewer clicks,
         | because they barely have any features!
         | 
         | Startup time is stable though: windows calculator has the same
         | startup time as excel. Don't get me started on microsoft
         | photos...
         | 
         | Modern UI quickly breaks down when you need to have complex
         | software - software that needs a menubar, for example.
        
           | slownews45 wrote:
           | Exactly, this is my complaint. The calculator app is SLOWER
           | with this modern UI, and I gain little in terms of
           | efficiency.
        
         | bitwize wrote:
         | > Fluent experiences listen and adapt... They unite people and
         | ideas, whether they're on opposite sides of the globe or
         | standing right next to each other... Fluent speaks in light and
         | shadow, in spatial dimensions...
         | 
         | BARF. I can hear the thrumming of Enya's "Storms in Africa"
         | behind this text...
        
           | drumttocs8 wrote:
           | Hey, that's a great song though.
        
             | bitwize wrote:
             | Considered on its own, it's quite lovely. I was going for
             | the overuse of it to punch up meaningless faux-
             | inspirational ad/prezo copy with generic positive vibes.
        
       | c-smile wrote:
       | We shall admit that to follow UI trends in one application is
       | relatively easy.
       | 
       | For example one application in last 15 years:
       | https://sciter.com/from-skeuomorph-to-flat-ui-evolution-of-o...
       | 
       | But to do the same on OS level - hundreds of different apps and
       | applets ... That's Sisyphean task to be honest.
       | 
       | We should be lucky that old stuff is still working and API that
       | appeared in Win 3 is still with us.
       | 
       | Actually that is not just Windows problem. On Linux, for example,
       | all these utilities were historically console UI applications
       | that are more "UI conservative" but even there - whole zoo of
       | different approaches...
        
         | nexuist wrote:
         | Well, the reason for the Linux utilities is because Linux
         | doesn't actually ship with a GUI; anything you see on screen is
         | drawn by a userspace program that all other programs interact
         | with (said program is called a "desktop environment" or DE).
         | 
         | Building text-based tools is much easier than building GUIs on
         | Linux because you have to target a specific GUI architecture
         | like X11 / Wayland, and then you also have to think about
         | fitting in with whatever window manager the user uses; GNOME /
         | KDE / whatever.
         | 
         | On Mac or Windows, you build a GUI using the vendor's tools and
         | you're golden. No need to worry about how the user is getting
         | windows to show up on their screen because every user is using
         | the same software to do so. For similar reasons, a lot of
         | software just says screw it and targets Ubuntu only so they
         | don't have to support your weird configuration on any other
         | distro.
        
       | snowwrestler wrote:
       | I mean, it's fun to dunk on Microsoft OS design, but aren't we
       | looking at screenshots from a leaked early build? Seems
       | reasonable that it looks a bit hacked together at this point.
       | Maybe it will launch this way. But maybe it won't.
        
         | Loeffelmaenn wrote:
         | I mean people thought the same thing about Windows 10 and to
         | this day it's a mix of 7 different designs or so.
        
         | emsy wrote:
         | It's reasonable to assume it won't, when you see how legacy UI
         | was kept mostly unchanged at least since Windows XP.
        
       | nmeofthestate wrote:
       | Very contrived over-counting.
        
       | notimetorelax wrote:
       | Admins can you please change the url to the old Reddit UI. The
       | new UI is locked on mobile Safari.
       | 
       | https://old.reddit.com/r/Windows11/comments/o2a0kp/there_are...
        
       | turminal wrote:
       | Wow, reddit really hates website users.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-06-18 23:02 UTC)