Hey, my son and I run this site. Cool to see it here. Thanks for stopping by!
Thanks for your work! Just uncovered a gem.
Appreciate it, thank you!
Design evolution of the Windows control panel
101–110 of 112 posts
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#102Windows 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.
Surely, Windows 95 was the pinnacle. ;)
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Double clicking on an icon in windows does one of 3 things:
- opens a folder
- opens a document
- executes a program
I think it is reasonable for a user to assume those icons in the control panel are programs and worry whether they’ll open a dialogue with an “okay” and “cancel” option or just do something.
We have the same problem on the command line. We can reasonably assume that `config-program -—help` won’t execute anything, but we don’t know until we try. However, we are assured that `man config-program` won’t execute anything.
The sidebar brings intermediate users closer to assurance and helps novice users understand where they are.
At least that’s how I see it as a good UX addition to windows. I wouldn’t be surprised if most scared users wouldn’t even look at the sidebar.
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#104Has MS announced plans to port the Hotdog Stand theme to W11?
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#105Windows 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.
No idea about the display scaling and included software, but SerenityOS has the same aesthetics IMO, could be worth checking out.
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Frankly I wish I could do that with Android. If I use my decade-old shitty bluetooth headphones I get no perceptible lag and I can game with them.
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#107I had completely forgotten about wireless link. Tried it with my Sony Walkman phone once. I was able to transfer a presentation to my phone via infrared, then use my phone to show (and control) the presentation in my classroom. It was one of the most magical things I’ve probably ever done.
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#108Windows 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.
Surprising then that Windows has no settings for touchscreens (it has for touchpads).
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#109Why does Windows not have settings for touchscreens? (It has for touchpads.)
Re: Design evolution of the Windows control panel
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Double clicking on an icon in windows does one of 3 things: - opens a folder - opens a document - executes a program I think it is reasonable for a user to assume those icons in the control panel are programs and worry whether they’ll open a dialogue with an “okay” and “cancel” option or just do something. We have the same problem on the command line. We can reasonably assume that `config-program -—help` won’t execut…
Programs meant to be ran by doube-clicking (rather than invoked as a command) generally are not meant to do anything until the user commands them to by clicking something else in their window. An application launching is meant to be kind of a "pure function", a side-effect-free operation (of popping up the app Window) from the user point of view.
If you design an app which writes anything into a document file as soon as you open the document in them you are doing it really wrong.
This given, the confusion you describe comes straight from lack of awareness of the UI metaphor logic in the software engineers. A well-designed GUI app (a non-GUI app should not be executed by double-clicking at all) would do virtually nothing to leave any traces (let alone break anything) right after you run them, by just launching them or "launching" any specific document to be opened in them.
But I get your point. From the practical point of view - given the reality, what we actually have, you are perfectly right.