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

Design evolution of the Windows control panel

versionmuseum.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 112 posts

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#81

Post by gjvc »

pkrumins wrote: post #25
gjvc wrote: post #2

Windows 2000 was clearly the peak in this article, and (as a whole system) it did feel like it at the time. (I do wish it had included ClearType though...)

Totally agree ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28346076 ). Computing is coming to an end with these new dumb interfaces.

On that thread torgoguys says "I see 2000s UI as being from a time when (for the most part) they weren't trying to impress you with the gloss on the UI. They were just trying to make it clear and usable. More modern iterations of Windows has some advancements in interactions but not much in the GUI controls themselves." which is such a good observation, I think it bears repeating here. (emphasis added by me)

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#82

Post by Dma54rhs »

najqh wrote: post #58
causi wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tried using bluetooth speakers with Windows. It was fucking atrocious because Windows makes zero effort to compensate for bluetooth lag. Watch a video file or a Youtube video on Android and it inserts a split second of delay into the stream so the video and audio sync up. Windows does nothing of the sort, and it feels like you're watching a dubbed foreign language film.

This does not match my experience using Airpods Pro on Windows. On the other hand it is seemingly impossible to use the microphone of these Airpods and listen to music at the same time. The quality is atrocious. Something that I assume is possible on a Mac. (Anybody knows of a solution? I read it's because of bluetooth profiles or whatever...)

Regarding quality, what version of Bluetooth did the chip on your windows machine supported and what features? This can be the answer, it usually switches profile when using mic to compensate for latency that gives you shitty audio quad liturgy but it's much better with newer Bluetooth versions in my opinion.

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#83

Post by wodenokoto »

dusted wrote: post #57

Windows 2000 control panel was perfect. I'd take pretty much any of the interfaces over the abominiation that is windows 10 control panel. It's form over function so hard it hurts, in a place where function is all I want. I'm not on a "journey" or having an "experience" or whatever they're aiming for. I just want to change a setting, so show me ALL the settings programs, RIGHT NOW. It's laughable how much you need to…

Why does the control panel need an address bar and back buttons?

I think the 98 side panel added to 95 would be the best usability. Not every user knows it is safe to open the programs in the control panel (maybe it’ll change something if I run it!) so the select icon to view description was a really good idea imho.

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#84

Post by qwerty456127 »

It's degradation, not evolution. Windows 3.11 - 98 control panels were the best. If only they had built-in parameter search option (kind of like VLC's settings advanced view) they would be perfect. All the GUIs should have been searchable by the way, so sad Ubuntu's Unity is dead.

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#85

Post by qwerty456127 »

wodenokoto wrote: post #83
dusted wrote: post #57

Windows 2000 control panel was perfect. I'd take pretty much any of the interfaces over the abominiation that is windows 10 control panel. It's form over function so hard it hurts, in a place where function is all I want. I'm not on a "journey" or having an "experience" or whatever they're aiming for. I just want to change a setting, so show me ALL the settings programs, RIGHT NOW. It's laughable how much you need to…

Why does the control panel need an address bar and back buttons? I think the 98 side panel added to 95 would be the best usability. Not every user knows it is safe to open the programs in the control panel (maybe it’ll change something if I run it!) so the select icon to view description was a really good idea imho.

> Not every user knows it is safe to open the programs in the control panel (maybe it’ll change something if I run it!)

That's why old Windows versions had Cancel buttons in every configuration window.

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#86

Post by jaclaz »

tech-historian wrote: post #6

Hey, my son and I run this site. Cool to see it here. Thanks for stopping by!

Thanks for the nice site/review.

As a side note somehow (and as I see it) "evolution" has a positive connotation, i.e. an evolution step brings something that is seen as "better", and unfortunately, in the case of Windows Control Panel, this is very hard to state.

By reading the title only I had the at first sight impression of the article being some form of MS fanboysm.

Something like "How the Windows Control Panel design changed over 36 years" would IMHO be more neutral.

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#88

Post by aasasd »

clavicat wrote: post #45

The control panel was solved, so to speak, once they added a search interface. It doesn’t matter how complicated the hierarchy of modules is if what you want is only a search away. Only Microsoft could unsolve a solved problem by segregating the settings into two paradigms, neither of which is a superset of the other. Even the duplicated functionalities are not equivalent—the list of programs you can uninstall with t…

> * The control panel was solved, so to speak, once they added a search interface. It doesn’t matter how complicated the hierarchy of modules is if what you want is only a search away.*

Uh-huh... unless you don't know what the option is called. Ever tried using translated Windows? I spent hours upon hours wading through those dialogs gawking at the oddities that were supposed to be computer-themed terms in my native language. If you tell me I need to formulate those freaky things in my head, you're gonna get a laugh in your face.

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#89

Post by Aa9C4xPz43Gg7k6 »

dusted wrote: post #57

Windows 2000 control panel was perfect. I'd take pretty much any of the interfaces over the abominiation that is windows 10 control panel. It's form over function so hard it hurts, in a place where function is all I want. I'm not on a "journey" or having an "experience" or whatever they're aiming for. I just want to change a setting, so show me ALL the settings programs, RIGHT NOW. It's laughable how much you need to…

10 is half-assed attempt at porting control panel to tablet/touch UI. I hated it. At the same time I have to say that 11 ported enough of it to new UI that I barely need Win32 control panel anymore.

Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel

#90

Post by Fnoord »

bni wrote: post #75
dusted wrote: post #57

Windows 2000 control panel was perfect. I'd take pretty much any of the interfaces over the abominiation that is windows 10 control panel. It's form over function so hard it hurts, in a place where function is all I want. I'm not on a "journey" or having an "experience" or whatever they're aiming for. I just want to change a setting, so show me ALL the settings programs, RIGHT NOW. It's laughable how much you need to…

I agree about Windows 2000, it was the pinnacle of Windows UI. The font, buttons and how everything is spaced is just perfect. I wish we could have a minimalistic Windows, that have this UI. Just x3, x4 integer scaling so it can display on modern screens. No crapware included by default. And then you download software you need form the net, like browsers, mailclient, torrent client, games, or what ever you need.

> The font, buttons and how everything is spaced is just perfect. I wish we could have a minimalistic Windows, that have this UI.

Does ReactOS tick the requirements? It is FOSS.

Post reply on HN