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

Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

socket3.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 176 posts

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#11

Post by lucb1e »

Reading this, I wonder about all the UIs that I come across today and feel like they're usually on a scale from flawed to awful (see also: store reviews of software, especially after an update). Not being from the software development world, can anyone who is confirm whether this type of user testing still takes place at all? Or is it perhaps confined to big redesigns, specific user groups (like beginning computer users, even for developer tools like vmware), or other such constraints?

Edit: reading further, this is a great example: "Separate UI for Beginners [...] [various problems mentioned] [...] For these reasons and others, we abandoned the idea". These reasons translate directly, one-to-one, to Android's simple homescreen variant that my grandma kept finding somehow, clicking on, and then not being able to use various things on her phone anymore. Nor getting more comfortable with the proper UI. Nor was it consistent with other apps. Android added this feature when, a decade earlier, it was already spotted (long before release, I should note) that such a variant wouldn't help people at all. This doesn't appear to have been thought about or tested in the real world, and I think Android is the most-used OS on the planet. (Not sure if all vendor's shells have this feature as well, but I'm fairly sure it was stock android or at least commonly implemented a few versions ago.)

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#12

Post by cardanome »

Back then you could test your UI on people that were a completely blank slate, having possible never used a computer before. You could focus on making the best possible UI there is.

Now, users come already with certain habits and expectations developed by years of of computer use.

This means, even if you really cared about the user experience of your customers you would only be able to make incremental improvements to the status quo or else be be rejected for being too different.

Not that certain standards are not also valuable but it still a sobering thought that we are in a local optimum that we will never be able to escape from. (And I fear most products are not even hitting the local optimum but are getting worse when it comes to UI design but that is besides the point.)

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#13

Post by warning26 »

lucb1e wrote: post #11

Reading this, I wonder about all the UIs that I come across today and feel like they're usually on a scale from flawed to awful (see also: store reviews of software, especially after an update). Not being from the software development world, can anyone who is confirm whether this type of user testing still takes place at all? Or is it perhaps confined to big redesigns, specific user groups (like beginning computer us…

Generally big companies hire UX Researchers, whose job is specifically to conduct these types of tests.

To address your second question, it depends on the test. For example, during a recent test where I work (fairly large tech company), we used user logs to identify a set of "power users", since that's who we were interested in learning more about.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#14

Post by LarryDarrell »

I would love to see a similar paper by the Windows 11 design team. The 95 group seemed to be very responsive to how users were using or failing to use the OS. I've been on Win11 for a few months, and I'm confused who these changes are for. It could be that the Eternal September means things have to be dumbed down and locked down, catering to the least capable users. Or maybe design decisions are being made at a higher level for inscrutable business reasons. Either way, I'm feeling left behind.

I think there's a tension between Desktop, Laptop and Tablet users that the Windows Team has decided to just ignore. Or they have decided that Desktop users are not important. I spent extra for a widescreen monitor that would give me more vertical pixels. What does Windows think I want to do with these pixels? Use them to display a big, honkin' new Taskbar, apparently. Why did they take away the option to make it thinner? Why is "Every user must have a Big Fat Taskbar" the hill they want to die on? And the modern-ish design language feels like it was designed to waste space and hide information. I have a huge screen, I don't want a 3+ click minimum to get to any setting.

Third-party bloatware, permanent rounded corners for some reason, the take-it-or-I-dare-you-to-switch-to-Linux attitude does not give me warm fuzzy fealings. I would switch to linux, but I make my living with .Net/C#/WPF, so great job Microsoft, I feel trapped rather than valued.

For now, I'm still able to cobble together the tools that make Windows a mostly-pleasant Desktop experience. I use Directory Opus, Open Shell (with ExplorerPatcher for Win11), Everything Search, and some registry edits to do things like bring the normal Context Menu back.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#15

Post by MonkeyMalarky »

I think windows 95/98 era was the peak of UI discoverability. As a kid, I and my friends could learn and explore how a program worked just by expanding all the menus and opening the various dialogs. Dialogs which were filled with fields and their descriptions! Before then, it was the world of DOS and you had to know what you were doing ahead of time. And now, UIs are dynamic, initially hiding stuff from the user and at worst provide zero indication of what functionality is available. I once used a phone app for months not knowing there was an extra screen you could open by sliding right on the main UI page. I only found it by accident one day, because there were no hints in the UI..

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#16

Post by pdntspa »

warning26 wrote: post #7
pdntspa wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know, like can the UI/UX people please please PLEASE pay more attention to this stuff!

You'll find that the vast majority of bad UX decisions aren't coming from designers themselves, but from management. See also: A/B testing UIs to maximize arbitrary metrics

Designers are the gatekeepers though, maybe they should stand up to these folks more often.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#18

Post by bombcar »

warning26 wrote: post #13
lucb1e wrote: post #11

Reading this, I wonder about all the UIs that I come across today and feel like they're usually on a scale from flawed to awful (see also: store reviews of software, especially after an update). Not being from the software development world, can anyone who is confirm whether this type of user testing still takes place at all? Or is it perhaps confined to big redesigns, specific user groups (like beginning computer us…

Generally big companies hire UX Researchers, whose job is specifically to conduct these types of tests. To address your second question, it depends on the test. For example, during a recent test where I work (fairly large tech company), we used user logs to identify a set of "power users", since that's who we were interested in learning more about.

Nowadays I fear many UX researchers are hired to find reasons for whatever silly design decision someone in power wants to do.

Or perhaps all the "easy pickings" have been picked and there's not much left.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#19

Post by Sakos »

LarryDarrell wrote: post #14

I would love to see a similar paper by the Windows 11 design team. The 95 group seemed to be very responsive to how users were using or failing to use the OS. I've been on Win11 for a few months, and I'm confused who these changes are for. It could be that the Eternal September means things have to be dumbed down and locked down, catering to the least capable users. Or maybe design decisions are being made at a highe…

Some changes are really cool, but then marred by bizarre UX decisions that make absolutely zero sense to me and make things everything more tedious and difficult and I'm wondering how they're making these decisions. It's not being made by somebody who actually cares about Windows users.

Re: Designing Windows 95’s User Interface (2018)

#20

Post by lstamour »

Note this is still on the internet at https://dl.acm.org/doi/fullHtml/10.1145/238386.238611

The blog post is (2018) and the original article it republishes is (1996) according to Google.

You can also find it on Archive.org at https://web.archive.org/web/20220504061157/https://dl.acm.or...

Post reply on HN