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

Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 242 posts

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#111

Post by JamesT_Kirk »

linuseouyt wrote: post #82
parliament32 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just an Ubuntu-ism. Linux doesn't require a reboot for anything other than kernel updates (and dbus in special cases). On a side note it's a bad idea to run Ubuntu on a server in prod. Ubuntu is great for desktop and pretty trash for everything else. You'd be better off just running Debian, it's a lot more stable.

> Linux doesn't require a reboot for anything other than kernel updates You can say the same about Windows updates. Ubuntu has a new kernel update every 3 weeks, unless CVEs force sooner ones. https://wiki.kubuntu.org/Kernel/StableReleaseCadence Anyway, parent was saying that Windows is shit because it forces frequent updates. Ubuntu, which as you say it's the closest to a user friendly Linux dist does the same thing…

Not really. Linux Mint is more popular and is far more usable and stable in my experience. And it does not force updates.

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#112

Post by dingo_bat »

0x38B wrote: post #60
pwinnski wrote: post #13

Good times. I remember when this was part of the court case. Sounds like what we need is for Tim Cook to try to use iOS 13 and lose access to one of his favorite apps by upgrading to Catalina, and then to get a crumb or something into his keyboard.

...or try using Google Docs in Safari on iOS 13 with a text editor in split view. Two blinking cursors and no easy way to choose which window is active. To enter text in the Google Doc after using my text editor, I have to tap the URL bar twice, dismiss the suggestions, and then it's active. Given that my iPad is my only computer, this release has been really rough. It's getting there, and I'm sure with time it will…

> Given that my iPad is my only computer, this release has been really rough

This right here is the problem. General rule: If an ipad is your only computer, you don't really need a computer. If you really need a computer, ipad cannot be it.

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#113

Post by TheKarateKid »

asveikau wrote: post #109
tinus_hn wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t forget Windows ME which was truly a turd in a class of its own.

I still don't completely understand why they didn't make Win2k into a "consumer" product. A lot of techies here who installed Windows themselves in that era probably skipped ME and went to that. But all the consumer PCs shipped with 98 or ME. I remembering hearing at the time that this was about hardware support and/or app compatibility. But my cynical side just thinks they wanted to justify charging more for a works…

Actually, ME was the result of a development disaster similar to the one which resulted in Vista.

Microsoft was planning on building an entirely new Internet-focused consumer version of NT. It was too ambitious for its time, so to meet deadlines, most of it was scrapped and some UI elements were backported into an updated Windows 98 which became ME. This is why Explorer for both ME and 2000 look similar despite having little else in common.

Other elements of the scrapped project made its way into XP, but barely compared to what it was supposed to be. I think XP’s fancy login screen was one of them.

If anyone’s interested I’ll try to find where I read all of this. It might’ve been on Paul Thurrott’s Windows Supersite or another site that collected Windows betas.

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#115

Post by pishpash »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #52

The early 2000's were a period of especially low usability for Microsoft's products. At the time, I had a roommate who was a die-hard Windows user. Over several years, I tried to convince him to switch to Mac OS X, with examples like: (a) Just drag/drop a PDF to a printer spool window, and it will print; (b) to install an app, usually you just have to drag it to the Applications folder; to uninstall it, simply drag i…

After OS X, has anybody ever switched back to Windows from a Mac OS for daily use (i.e. not for a specific application that is only available on Windows)?

I don't even want to look at Windows now. It's so unsightly in a way that you don't notice until you switch away.

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#116

Post by NicoJuicy »

TimTheTinker wrote: post #52

The early 2000's were a period of especially low usability for Microsoft's products. At the time, I had a roommate who was a die-hard Windows user. Over several years, I tried to convince him to switch to Mac OS X, with examples like: (a) Just drag/drop a PDF to a printer spool window, and it will print; (b) to install an app, usually you just have to drag it to the Applications folder; to uninstall it, simply drag i…

2) Right click - print

2) Double click setup

3) open setup again - remove option or the more opaque way, uninstall through configuration - software

Your points wouldn't convince me actually.

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#117

Post by kristiandupont »

gist wrote: post #37
enitihas wrote: post #18

Bill was doing a fantastic job here, but it is a bit too sad to see how most of the executives in the mail show much less concern for the company's and customer's goals, and more concerns on who should own the problem. I think this is a bit too common in any corporate environment.

> Bill was doing a fantastic job here Fantastic job of what? Building a company that has a typical type of organization, employees and incentives that this can happen at? It's like the CEO of Comcast (Brian Roberts) going into a Comcast store (in stealth; or phoning them) and then experiencing the frustration of a normal customer and the idiots they deal with. There is ZERO reason a large company with resources can't…

>There is ZERO reason a large company with resources can't make sure that things like this don't happen

The fallacy that if you have a lot of resources, you can make a good product is repeated over and over again and it's easy to see why. But the fact is that making high quality is hard, very hard. You can't just hire your way out of it. You can't just spend on tools or whatever. A small-ish team of talented people that work well together (that last part is important and not trivial at all) can accomplish amazing things. A dysfunctional team or organization can easily get stuck in a rut that is next to impossible to improve, no matter how many resources you throw at it.

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#118

Post by NicoJuicy »

stephenr wrote: post #40
AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your assessment, and as a daily Windows user I believe I can answer your question: because the alternatives are still somehow worse.

We clearly have different ideas of “worse”.

Perhaps with you, but looking at the market share he is mostly right.

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#119

Post by PhasmaFelis »

jseliger wrote: post #63
TimTheTinker wrote: post #52

The early 2000's were a period of especially low usability for Microsoft's products. At the time, I had a roommate who was a die-hard Windows user. Over several years, I tried to convince him to switch to Mac OS X, with examples like: (a) Just drag/drop a PDF to a printer spool window, and it will print; (b) to install an app, usually you just have to drag it to the Applications folder; to uninstall it, simply drag i…

This kind of thing also got me to OS X. Now I'm looking at fiascos like the MBA/MBP keyboards, the bug-fests that are x.0 OS updates, and the way Catalina kills 32-bit applications for little reason (that I can discern), and I find myself wondering if I should quit the Mac world.

Ditto. I love my MBP, it's still tottering along after 10 years (!), but it's on its last legs. the keyboard fiasco had me thinking that maybe my next backpack computer might not be a Mac...and then here comes Catalina with no 32-bit support and App Store-onerous requirements to get software signed, and fuck that.

MS' Surface Books look pretty cool. Or maybe I'll just get a bigger backpack and tote my 17" gaming laptop around.

Re: Bill Gates on Windows Usability (2003)

#120

Post by Lammy »

TheKarateKid wrote: post #113
asveikau wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still don't completely understand why they didn't make Win2k into a "consumer" product. A lot of techies here who installed Windows themselves in that era probably skipped ME and went to that. But all the consumer PCs shipped with 98 or ME. I remembering hearing at the time that this was about hardware support and/or app compatibility. But my cynical side just thinks they wanted to justify charging more for a works…

Actually, ME was the result of a development disaster similar to the one which resulted in Vista. Microsoft was planning on building an entirely new Internet-focused consumer version of NT. It was too ambitious for its time, so to meet deadlines, most of it was scrapped and some UI elements were backported into an updated Windows 98 which became ME. This is why Explorer for both ME and 2000 look similar despite havin…

Windows codename Neptune: https://microsoft.fandom.com/wiki/Microsoft_Neptune

It’s interesting to see twenty year old experiments with flat UI designs considering how dominant that style is today with Android 5, iOS 7, Windows 8, etc.

Post reply on HN