Interesting thoughts on Windows 7 design from a long-time Mac user(marco.org)
marco.org
Interesting thoughts on Windows 7 design from a long-time Mac user
http://www.marco.org/137217915
41 comments
It's not often you hear of Microsoft setting design or usability trends, but the Office ribbon has seen a pretty vast uptake. As a UI designer I have personally implemented it in various web apps. I'm looking forward to what Microsoft does next, honestly.
I know an engineer who was not only frustrated with the ribbon, but actually attributed it to Vista (i.e. to say she "didn't like Vista" when what she described was clearly a feature of Office).
I suspect she was just too used to the old way (for better or for worse), but that's still valid. Maybe the ribbon isn't bad, but Microsoft should have introduced it more gradually, e.g. alongside a familiar menu bar instead of replacing the menu bar completely.
I suspect she was just too used to the old way (for better or for worse), but that's still valid. Maybe the ribbon isn't bad, but Microsoft should have introduced it more gradually, e.g. alongside a familiar menu bar instead of replacing the menu bar completely.
I won't deny the Microsoft ribbon has a really steep learning curve, but it's valuable even if just to learn how not to design/implement a ribbon.
The people that I have met that have difficulty adjusting to the ribbon (my 60 year old father, other 20 year old students etc) have either adjusted to it over time, or simply never made an effort to learn how to use it, and continue to complain about it.
The people that I have met that have difficulty adjusting to the ribbon (my 60 year old father, other 20 year old students etc) have either adjusted to it over time, or simply never made an effort to learn how to use it, and continue to complain about it.
Why is the ribbon usable? What positive effects have you seen that caused you to implement it in various apps. As a user interface designer, how is the ribbon better than the interface it replaces?
I don't doubt what you say, but anecdotal claims are not very interesting -- nor do they convince me I should be awaiting Microsoft's next innovation with baited breath, if that's your intent.
I don't doubt what you say, but anecdotal claims are not very interesting -- nor do they convince me I should be awaiting Microsoft's next innovation with baited breath, if that's your intent.
It's easier to use -- all the buttons visible at any given time are related in some way, so it's easier to find what you're looking for (or conversely, to tell if what you're looking for is not currently visible.
It's more amendable to touch-based interfaces. Bigger buttons = more area to click.
It's more amendable to touch-based interfaces. Bigger buttons = more area to click.
Windows is dead. I know of no developers using Windows anymore, myself included, except for gaming, visual studio or directx development. Everything programming-wise is nix focused and Mac won because of that. OSX is the perfect *nix backend with usable front end.
When you win over the developers, things are gonna change. Developers, developers, devel...
When you win over the developers, things are gonna change. Developers, developers, devel...
I only know developers using Windows. Does that cancels your argument?
Are they using it for anything other than visual studio?
It was a boisterous claim, but there is a movement. Two things I think are causing it...
1) I think though something major happened with the move to intel chips and a nix backend to OSX. Dropping PowerPC and the old Mac OS is something Microsoft couldn't do and now Windows is stuck.
2) Also major market changes that push it that direction.
- iPhone/Touch device and market
- Dynamic languages like python + ruby and rails/django web frameworks associated with them
- XBOX 360 caused people who were windows PC gamers to go console, making the main reason to buy a PC in the past (games) largely moot.
- New multi-platform game engines like Unity3D and now that Mac is Intel you can develop for both easily. (unity3d is what initially made me make the switch)
- The cloud computing paradigm (yes it is buzz but real) is pretty much not windows based, it pushes cheap nix OSes and a nix based OS as your base is much better.
- Distributed source control such as git that weren't and aren't very Windows friendly
- Finally good systems, right click, and killer machines (one dude I know has a 30 inch Mac screen and a 32GB 8 processor Pro, it is a monster). These things look like giant iPods now rather than colored beads.
- OpenGL is resurging with Khronos support (ES for mobile and all associated libraries)
Every developer that I know that has gone that direction has not come back, typically these are talented developers as well and long time windows people (myself included, C++ MFC, MCSD C++, MCSD.NET, .net developer for 8 years, did one of the first public .net sites with Microsoft for a large CPG packaging goods company, game developer on windows)
There are more reasons but I see the change, do you? The fact that you can run lots of great tools even Windows within parallels or bootcamp also added to the move.
Once you go Mac you never go...
Windows will still be needed for development for some time, but all new, fun and multi-platform development it is not required anymore. That being said I have two monster machines, Vista 64bit PC and an iMac and I need and use them both. I can tell you which one is more fun to work on though...
It was a boisterous claim, but there is a movement. Two things I think are causing it...
1) I think though something major happened with the move to intel chips and a nix backend to OSX. Dropping PowerPC and the old Mac OS is something Microsoft couldn't do and now Windows is stuck.
2) Also major market changes that push it that direction.
- iPhone/Touch device and market
- Dynamic languages like python + ruby and rails/django web frameworks associated with them
- XBOX 360 caused people who were windows PC gamers to go console, making the main reason to buy a PC in the past (games) largely moot.
- New multi-platform game engines like Unity3D and now that Mac is Intel you can develop for both easily. (unity3d is what initially made me make the switch)
- The cloud computing paradigm (yes it is buzz but real) is pretty much not windows based, it pushes cheap nix OSes and a nix based OS as your base is much better.
- Distributed source control such as git that weren't and aren't very Windows friendly
- Finally good systems, right click, and killer machines (one dude I know has a 30 inch Mac screen and a 32GB 8 processor Pro, it is a monster). These things look like giant iPods now rather than colored beads.
- OpenGL is resurging with Khronos support (ES for mobile and all associated libraries)
Every developer that I know that has gone that direction has not come back, typically these are talented developers as well and long time windows people (myself included, C++ MFC, MCSD C++, MCSD.NET, .net developer for 8 years, did one of the first public .net sites with Microsoft for a large CPG packaging goods company, game developer on windows)
There are more reasons but I see the change, do you? The fact that you can run lots of great tools even Windows within parallels or bootcamp also added to the move.
Once you go Mac you never go...
Windows will still be needed for development for some time, but all new, fun and multi-platform development it is not required anymore. That being said I have two monster machines, Vista 64bit PC and an iMac and I need and use them both. I can tell you which one is more fun to work on though...
To provide counterpoint to your "Once you go Mac you never go...", I did exactly that last month.
My previous computer was PB12. Yes, it is dated, but until unibody MBP13 introduction Apple didn't have any other model to replace it. Well, they still don't have anything able to replace it. MBP13 has shiny display, non-replaceable battery etc. Combined with unavailability of next OSX release for PPC, I had to choose what's next. So I got an Thinkpad, that has proper display instead of mirror, easily replaceable batteries and few other perks (you can put a second battery into DVD-RW bay, and it has built-in WWAN card with great antena, oh and the keyboard rules, yay!).
Regarding Unix-yness, you can run Linux of your choice either natively or in vmware (I run mine in vmware), and I'm satisfied. I don't care for iLife (I used just iTunes anyway; winamp is OK replacement) or iWork. Things that I do care for are equally well done on Windows and OSX.
My previous computer was PB12. Yes, it is dated, but until unibody MBP13 introduction Apple didn't have any other model to replace it. Well, they still don't have anything able to replace it. MBP13 has shiny display, non-replaceable battery etc. Combined with unavailability of next OSX release for PPC, I had to choose what's next. So I got an Thinkpad, that has proper display instead of mirror, easily replaceable batteries and few other perks (you can put a second battery into DVD-RW bay, and it has built-in WWAN card with great antena, oh and the keyboard rules, yay!).
Regarding Unix-yness, you can run Linux of your choice either natively or in vmware (I run mine in vmware), and I'm satisfied. I don't care for iLife (I used just iTunes anyway; winamp is OK replacement) or iWork. Things that I do care for are equally well done on Windows and OSX.
I recently experienced some hardware unpleasantness and have just upgraded my main desktop. I've run Windows on my DIY custom built desktops for about the last ten years (much of that time has been using XP). What have I just bought to replace my dead desktop? A Mac Pro. I won't be going back.
As a counterpoint, I have a friend who's done .Net based web development for some years. I couldn't convince him to dump it and join me in open source land, but he is just starting to get into .Net MVC. He has purchased a new high end Dell laptop that he will run Windows 7 on and this will be his main machine. He won't be moving from Windows any time soon, likely never. He says he's invested too much time in .Net. It's what he's comfortable with and that pretty much trumps anything else for him.
As a counterpoint, I have a friend who's done .Net based web development for some years. I couldn't convince him to dump it and join me in open source land, but he is just starting to get into .Net MVC. He has purchased a new high end Dell laptop that he will run Windows 7 on and this will be his main machine. He won't be moving from Windows any time soon, likely never. He says he's invested too much time in .Net. It's what he's comfortable with and that pretty much trumps anything else for him.
MS didn't make the wrong processor choice to begin with; it was never stuck, so it didn't need to make that change.
Game consoles have been around as long as, if not longer than, personal computers. For the past 10 years straight, the top selling games have been...computer games, like WoW and the Sims (and Myst, before them).
Distributed source control is not the end all of programming. At best, it's a niche. Real companies use commercial source control systems.
Name one major game coming out next year that uses OpenGL. PS3 games don't count. Can't think of one, can you?
BTW, last month, Windows Vista shipped more copies than OSX sold in its entire decade-long run. So...Windows is not likely to become irrelevant soon.
As for fun...Clicking the pretty buttons to close windows may amuse folks of a simpler persuasion, but I find it more enjoyable to play actual games on my computer.
Game consoles have been around as long as, if not longer than, personal computers. For the past 10 years straight, the top selling games have been...computer games, like WoW and the Sims (and Myst, before them).
Distributed source control is not the end all of programming. At best, it's a niche. Real companies use commercial source control systems.
Name one major game coming out next year that uses OpenGL. PS3 games don't count. Can't think of one, can you?
BTW, last month, Windows Vista shipped more copies than OSX sold in its entire decade-long run. So...Windows is not likely to become irrelevant soon.
As for fun...Clicking the pretty buttons to close windows may amuse folks of a simpler persuasion, but I find it more enjoyable to play actual games on my computer.
WoW and the Sims 3 both use OpenGL based rendering engines (actually dual OpenGL and DirectX). They are multi-platform (Blizzard is smart) and run on Mac and PC. Almost all game engines except valve use this approach. This makes porting to PS3, Wii and other OpenGL like toolkits easy. XBOX360 + PC are DirectX based and PC/Mac/Wii/PS3 are OpenGL based. The highest selling games usually target both types.
I was just stating due to the recent consoles there is largely not a reason to get a PC solely for gaming as much as there always was. I personally am a PC gamer but I also develop games and most new stuff is multi-platform.
I was just stating due to the recent consoles there is largely not a reason to get a PC solely for gaming as much as there always was. I personally am a PC gamer but I also develop games and most new stuff is multi-platform.
The fact that you don't know any developer that is using Windows doesn't mean that is true.
The large array of apps that Windows support is still to massive to consider it dead.
I know, you could VM everything, but is not practical to do so.
I can see how this would be true, and hopefully not too optimistic. :) To add some data points...
Part of this is the hardware (MacBooks, etc. are very powerful). Syncing and staying mobile are very easy with Macs. It's becoming more typical to get useful work done in airports, coffee shops, back porches, etc. over wireless.
If a shift to web applications continues, the majority of them will surely be developed on Macs. If you're using Ruby, Python, Apache, etc. anyway, it's sure nice to have them all pre-installed. On Windows, not only do you not have any of this, you don't even have SSH or a decent terminal, or equivalents to the core Unix utilities. (Oh wait, you don't even have a real text editor!) There's always a few hours of work to download enough to make Windows usable. Not to mention doing it all again 6 months later, when the machine is hosed and you reinstall.
I don't use Windows over VM, but I know many do, and it would seem perfect for web development. From anywhere, you can basically run the vast majority of likely browsers and test changes immediately. That is a killer feature.
I prefer it for desktop application development too. While the environment can sometimes be "weird", there are good reasons for most differences. For example, I'm used to passing the same options to GCC on Solaris and Linux; although Mac OS X does its own thing, it's hard to argue with the fact that -F is simpler and loses no real information over -L + -I.
Apple also includes some amazing code analysis tools in Instruments. You could spend a lot of money just acquiring those tools on other platforms, even if the Mac had no other advantages at all.
Part of this is the hardware (MacBooks, etc. are very powerful). Syncing and staying mobile are very easy with Macs. It's becoming more typical to get useful work done in airports, coffee shops, back porches, etc. over wireless.
If a shift to web applications continues, the majority of them will surely be developed on Macs. If you're using Ruby, Python, Apache, etc. anyway, it's sure nice to have them all pre-installed. On Windows, not only do you not have any of this, you don't even have SSH or a decent terminal, or equivalents to the core Unix utilities. (Oh wait, you don't even have a real text editor!) There's always a few hours of work to download enough to make Windows usable. Not to mention doing it all again 6 months later, when the machine is hosed and you reinstall.
I don't use Windows over VM, but I know many do, and it would seem perfect for web development. From anywhere, you can basically run the vast majority of likely browsers and test changes immediately. That is a killer feature.
I prefer it for desktop application development too. While the environment can sometimes be "weird", there are good reasons for most differences. For example, I'm used to passing the same options to GCC on Solaris and Linux; although Mac OS X does its own thing, it's hard to argue with the fact that -F is simpler and loses no real information over -L + -I.
Apple also includes some amazing code analysis tools in Instruments. You could spend a lot of money just acquiring those tools on other platforms, even if the Mac had no other advantages at all.
> On Windows, not only do you not have any of this, you don't even have SSH or a decent terminal, or equivalents to the core Unix utilities.
Couldn't Microsoft just start doing this?
Couldn't Microsoft just start doing this?
You'd have to trust Microsoft to not play their usual compatibility games with everything (from web standards to gaming the ISO standard process).
Good luck with that.
Good luck with that.
MS would like to provide many tools and programs with Windows. The Justice Department and the European Union, however, are very much opposed to this.
That's why Europeans get to pay for Windows 7 without a browser or a media player in the year 2009.
That's why Europeans get to pay for Windows 7 without a browser or a media player in the year 2009.
Programmers have only ever programmed on Windows to target the customer base there. I use OSX, Windows and Linux regularly and I'd much rather develop under Linux. OSX isn't a good *nix when it comes to packages and all that open source at your finger tips is what makes Linux so good. I don't find much functional difference in the UIs of those operating systems.
I don't find much functional difference in the UIs of those operating systems.
I understand not having a preference, say, but thinking there's no functional difference is ignoring a decade of user studies and reports and a lot of common sense.
I understand not having a preference, say, but thinking there's no functional difference is ignoring a decade of user studies and reports and a lot of common sense.
OS X has a pretty complete set ports tree from FreeBSD (http://www.macports.org/). I haven't found anything that didn't compile either from ports or from a tarball. You just need to know UNIX and not just Linux.
Its more work to get things working from ports or compiling on OSX. My point isn't that somehow OSX is somehow fundamentally flawed - just that open source software works easier on Linux. Only because thats what the majority of open source is targeted at to be sure.
Interesting observations.
The Windows branding one is kind of funny; this isn't new for Microsoft, they've just decided to replace "Microsoft" with "Windows". I remember being amazed at the stupidity, I think almost every version of Windows since 1.0 has used the name "Microsoft" 5 times on the splash screen alone ("Microsoft Windows 95" with "Microsoft Internet Explorer", "(c)1995 Microsoft Corporation", a stylized "Microsoft" logo in the corner, "Registered trademark of Microsoft", etc.). Someone in that organization is basically nuts. :)
The Windows branding one is kind of funny; this isn't new for Microsoft, they've just decided to replace "Microsoft" with "Windows". I remember being amazed at the stupidity, I think almost every version of Windows since 1.0 has used the name "Microsoft" 5 times on the splash screen alone ("Microsoft Windows 95" with "Microsoft Internet Explorer", "(c)1995 Microsoft Corporation", a stylized "Microsoft" logo in the corner, "Registered trademark of Microsoft", etc.). Someone in that organization is basically nuts. :)
Mixed feelings on the updates, but Microsoft seems quick to patch security vulnerabilities lately. Same topic but unrelated, W7 will fetch and download drivers that it doesn't have installed.
I find OS X to be too monochromatic - I've made several modifications to get bolder icons, Dock, white text on black menubar. Granted, W7 does lack the same tightly controlled consistency as OS X, but I like the look.
I'm impressed with the Ribbon interface. The point about the large bezels - they make them stand out; it's a good design idea for Windows (note the distinction - it's good within their UI paradigm).
ed: clarity
I find OS X to be too monochromatic - I've made several modifications to get bolder icons, Dock, white text on black menubar. Granted, W7 does lack the same tightly controlled consistency as OS X, but I like the look.
I'm impressed with the Ribbon interface. The point about the large bezels - they make them stand out; it's a good design idea for Windows (note the distinction - it's good within their UI paradigm).
ed: clarity
If you want a really unique look, try control+option+command+8 on a Mac. :)
I used to use that for easier reading. Irony being, now that my Firefox skin and menubar are both black, it just makes them obnoxiously bright.
f.lux is wonderful though - lowers the colour temperature based on time of day, so you don't have a harsh 9100K monitor at 11 pm. Windows and Mac - http://www.stereopsis.com/flux/
ed: for even more fun, play with 'Filters' in the ColorSync Utility
f.lux is wonderful though - lowers the colour temperature based on time of day, so you don't have a harsh 9100K monitor at 11 pm. Windows and Mac - http://www.stereopsis.com/flux/
ed: for even more fun, play with 'Filters' in the ColorSync Utility
Wow, that's neat! Now I'm watching my favorite YouTube cooking videos and pretending I'm a nuclear scientist.
I was looking at a MacBook Air at a Fry's electronics, which had the inverted look, and I couldn't figure out what the hell was going on with the screen. I made sure to google control+option+command+8 before hitting it though...
I liked the Ribbon a lot before I got used to the Mac mentality of "reduce buttons at all costs". Ribbons work far better than lots of drop-down menus when you're dealing with something ridiculously complex.
OS X used to have an awesome theming app called Shapeshifter, which doesn't yet work for OS X. There was one ultrapervasive theme called Gaia that I've always wanted to play with and couldn't, since I came in on Leopard. Check it out: http://macthemes2.net/2007/08/10/theme-review-gaia/
OS X used to have an awesome theming app called Shapeshifter, which doesn't yet work for OS X. There was one ultrapervasive theme called Gaia that I've always wanted to play with and couldn't, since I came in on Leopard. Check it out: http://macthemes2.net/2007/08/10/theme-review-gaia/
Try Magnifique: http://magnifiqueapp.com/ (free)
Excellent! Playing with it now.
EDIT: Dammit, its Gaia theme is a third-party remake that's very glitchy. To its credit, it didn't delete system-crucial files when I removed all the testing themes.
EDIT: Dammit, its Gaia theme is a third-party remake that's very glitchy. To its credit, it didn't delete system-crucial files when I removed all the testing themes.
Anyone who doesn't live in a certain environment can't really give an objective view of these things. We may look at it and say "wow that's annoying" but a long time Windows user may look at it and say "Thank you Microsoft! Thank you for the Updates! I feel so much safer now! Oh and you hide those annoying system tray icons for me too! I LOVE YOU" Long time Windows users will probably be quite happy with Windows 7. For everyone else there are several good alternatives these days.
"I’m slightly amused that there were 8 updates already."
There were up to 10 test updates for the RC: http://blogs.technet.com/mu/archive/2009/05/08/upcoming-upda...
There were up to 10 test updates for the RC: http://blogs.technet.com/mu/archive/2009/05/08/upcoming-upda...
"First impressions of Windows 7 from a Mac user:
* I’m slightly amused that there were 8 updates already."
I welcome updates, I don't know what's so amusing.
Exactly, the update manager in Ubuntu boots up every couple of days for me to make sure my installation is the most up to date possible.
Is this the part where Marco starts slagging off Linux too?
Updates are good - it shows that someone is taking an active interest in maintaining a stable product and I think it is foolish to present blatant bias here when that aspect of your argument can be easily disproven.
Yes, Microsoft is copying Apple - They did it before with the first Windows, they'll more than likely do it again in the future.
Get over it fanboys.
Exactly, the update manager in Ubuntu boots up every couple of days for me to make sure my installation is the most up to date possible.
Is this the part where Marco starts slagging off Linux too?
Updates are good - it shows that someone is taking an active interest in maintaining a stable product and I think it is foolish to present blatant bias here when that aspect of your argument can be easily disproven.
Yes, Microsoft is copying Apple - They did it before with the first Windows, they'll more than likely do it again in the future.
Get over it fanboys.
The Mac software updater actually runs weekly in the background, it just doesn't bother you in case no updates are available.
Every single time I've installed Windows I've spend literally hours downloading and installing updates. Microsoft never seems to get the idea of rolling their myriad updates into a giant bundle update any more often than the annual service packs. So even when I need to install like 20 software updates on Mac OS X, it's all one or two passes rather than installing 200 in five passes.
It's actually a requirement forced upon them by businesses who like to be able to pick and choose patches that are relevant, rather than an amorphous blob.
Why don't businesses disable automatic updates and distribute patches through their IT departments? Why do I have to suffer for their requirements?
That's actually quite surprising, as I assumed it had to do with Microsoft's hardware support requirements. Windows has to support any arbitrary set of x86 hardware, whilst Apple can roll together OS updates because they only have to support a limited set of Macs.
That's actually quite surprising, as I assumed it had to do with Microsoft's hardware support requirements. Windows has to support any arbitrary set of x86 hardware, whilst Apple can roll together OS updates because they only have to support a limited set of Macs.
Marco has a tendency to be a snot. He's very bright, writes well, and I usually agree with the basics of what he's saying (in this case, his talk about their overcluttering made me think this was worth a submit), but he frequently sells past an agreeable point.
Still no system wide spell checking in edit fields. The simple word processor, write.exe doesn't even have spell check after all these years either.
>I'm slightly amused that there were 8 updates already.
Why? It's RC software.
>There’s an odd dichotomy with using text labels...
I actually turned text on in the taskbar, but nevertheless, it's pretty much the same as OS X. Doesn't one typically recognize a program by its icon in both OSes?
>The use of color is odd for OS X users.
The only place that seems overtly colorful is the login/locked screen. Certainly personal preference; the implied value judgement (that OS X is classy and Win7 is gaudy) is just silly.
>It seems like Microsoft is really hammering the Windows branding into your face as frequently as possible. Everything has Windows logos, the Start button’s logo glows eerily on hover, and everything is called Windows-something. Apple is much more subtle and conservative with the use of their name, the Mac name, and their logos.
This is just silly. The only place I see the Windows logo is the Start button. And the use of loaded adjectives - "eerily" for Windows, "subtle" and "conservative" for OS X - betrays any objectivity the author might have claimed.