Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

socket3.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 402 posts

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#331

Post by sangnoir »

> Beginning users and many intermediates relied almost exclusively on visible cues for finding commands. They relied on (and found intuitive) menu bars and tool bars, but did not use pop-up (or “context”) menus, even after training.

This is a lesson the Android team re-discovered decades later, resulting in Android dropping the "Menu" button. Apple still hasn't gotten the memo yet (3D Touch). The biggest usability negatives with context-menus are poor discoverability and inconsistency in different contexts.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#332

Post by [deleted] »

russellbeattie wrote: post #292
kllrnohj wrote: post #265

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wouldn't switch back because of the underlying crap that is the Windows [...] file system You lost me. HFS+ is arguably one of the worst file systems around (yes I know that Apple finally switched to APFS but that was fairly recent). I'm really curious what you actually liked about Mac's file system vs. Windows?

Hmmm... You're right of course. I didn't describe that well. I meant Unix file names and way of working with files vs. Windows. In other words, forward slashes, symlinks, mounts, sane permissions, etc. I hate dealing with drive letters, etc. What's a good name for this?

[deleted]

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#333

Post by rahoulb »

kmill wrote: post #297
smashingfiasco wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could always replace your usage of the modern macOS Finder with my poor and very incomplete clone of the classic Mac Finder. :) https://classicmacfinder.com

A few years ago, I actually searched around for an implementation of the classic finder, so this is very amusing for me to see actually implemented! What I was interested in back then was the idea that there was a direct correspondence between the folder window and the data structure on the hard disk, and that to the user these concepts should be indistinguishable. One part of the illusion is that a folder always app…

I also used to love the fact that the equivalent of kernel extensions (totally forgotten the name) could be disabled by moving them to a different folder. The file system IS the computer.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#334

Post by lukeh »

makecheck wrote: post #225
sodapopcan wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one thing I don't understand that Mac has never adopted is being able to use open and save dialogues as mini file explorers (move stuff around and rename, specifically). Having to switch to Finder to move or rename a file that has the same name as the file I'm trying to save is ridiculous. Of course I never need to do this anymore since I only work on text files under revision control, but it still seems odd to m…

While a fair point, it’s important that feature-rich OS components be designed correctly (including security) and this wasn’t the case with Windows. How many exploits were just a matter of tricking an extra-fancy OS dialog into popping open something it’s not supposed to, escalating permissions alongside it?

On OS X, open/save panels run in a different process via ViewBridge, at least they did last time I checked.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#335

Post by samstave »

rsync wrote: post #304
samstave wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m trying to suss up some old memories... But NT was the first winOS which supported multi-proc, correct? NT4 was the first OS I could have my dual 266 intel procs run softimage IIRC

"I’m trying to suss up some old memories..." NT4, Adaptec 2940u2w, and mirrored segate cheetah drives. You had to space them out because a stack of two cheetahs would cook the upper one to death ...

hahaha

I actually recall that Cheetah problem. :-)

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#336

Post by smashingfiasco »

rahoulb wrote: post #333
kmill wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few years ago, I actually searched around for an implementation of the classic finder, so this is very amusing for me to see actually implemented! What I was interested in back then was the idea that there was a direct correspondence between the folder window and the data structure on the hard disk, and that to the user these concepts should be indistinguishable. One part of the illusion is that a folder always app…

I also used to love the fact that the equivalent of kernel extensions (totally forgotten the name) could be disabled by moving them to a different folder. The file system IS the computer.

Agreed! I think that this behavior may have been one of the truly novel principles of classic Mac OS.

IIRC, you even used to be able to just swap the System folder around and have like a completely new/different install of Mac OS.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#337

Post by TomMarius »

jaclaz wrote: post #254
morsch wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic Mac OS (System 7 was contemporary to Windows 95) didn't really have any concept of minimisation or even maximization as such. There was no task bar or dock or anything else really to minimise to. IIRC there were addons for 7.1 that added "window shading": a button on the window title bar that reduces the window to just the title bar.[1] The closest thing to a maximise button in classic Mac OS was more like a…

>Classic Mac OS (System 7 was contemporary to Windows 95)... System 7 was WAY earlier than Windows 95, it was 1991, a little more than 4 years earler (like an eternity): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_7 "It was introduced on May 13, 1991 ..." And even 7.1 was almost exactly 3 years earlier: System 7.1 "In August 1992, the 7.1 update was released." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_95 "It was released on Aug…

Windows did exist before 3.1

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#338

Post by klibertp »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #228
saint_fiasco wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check the comment four levels above. Apparently it is not at all intuitive that folders can be inside other folders.

I don't understand that, the folder was picked for the filing cabinet metaphor. But in a filing cabinet system you have different cabinets, different drawers, different hanging files and various lower level arrangements - non-hanging folders (or drawer dividers), paper clips, staples. Perhaps they never saw a filing cabinet? Or never put something in a box, then in another box? When they put food in a cupboard do the…

> I've come across it, just assumed that no-one explained the metaphor to them.

If it was this simple, there would be no people who struggle to understand recursion. And I know of quite a few.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#339

Post by smashingfiasco »

kmill wrote: post #297
smashingfiasco wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could always replace your usage of the modern macOS Finder with my poor and very incomplete clone of the classic Mac Finder. :) https://classicmacfinder.com

A few years ago, I actually searched around for an implementation of the classic finder, so this is very amusing for me to see actually implemented! What I was interested in back then was the idea that there was a direct correspondence between the folder window and the data structure on the hard disk, and that to the user these concepts should be indistinguishable. One part of the illusion is that a folder always app…

Glad you're enjoying it!

It's got a loooonnggg way to go (I never realized how many small but vital details are in a file explorer application), but it's strangely exciting to see it draw itself on modern macOS, especially on a retina screen!

And yes, the spatial UX! I'm still working through getting all of that implemented (I just completed persisting window locations/positioning days ago). I have recently been reading theough some of John Siracusa's turn of the Mac OS X era writings and that's been hugely insightful and helpful. The level of detail (both of the original Finder and his writings) is impressive and sirprising.

Very cool UX concepts!

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface

#340

Post by digi_owl »

jhasse wrote: post #282
digi_owl wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sadly the workspaces are very much mouse oriented (want to switch between workspaces? Thats win+ctrl+number!). And there is no proper UI element for checking if you have anything open in a different workspace without opening the switcher.

You can switch with Ctrl+Win+Left/Right, too.

While true, it does not alleviate the finger yoga...
Post reply on HN