Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

jsnover.com

181–190 of 604 posts

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#181

Steven Sinofsky wrote this piece a couple of weeks ago about the same topic: https://x.com/stevesi/status/2036921223150440542

Is there any way to get to the article without going through x.com? xcancel.com just says "Nitter doesn't support this feature yet, but it might in the future."

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#182
One could argue the 17 solution summary is actually correct? Why should an os be limited to just one way of doing things. I don’t believe my own words 100% but it is a thought that maybe diversity is the eventual outcome. Ubuntu and MacOS are kinda fighting the same battle. Is that just the way it is?

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Web apps work everywhere. The web has grown increasingly powerful and capable. Why would I invest in a technology that can only run on a single OS? Doesn't make sense. You mean the hypertext platform that has been shoehorned into Java's paradigm, suffering from the same boof-o-rama as Windows, and whose lowest common denominator to support must be Safari for iOS?

still works everywhere? the snark doesnt get you firther than that

Works everywhere on modern hardware only.

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#184
MS Windows is walking joke for at least a decade, UI consistency isn't it biggest problem. Unfortunately both Linux and MacOS have their own deeply seated issues. This leaves users in an unenviable situation and encourages experimenting, with AI encouraging more and faster attempts. When AI are getting better... I hope this question will become unimportant sooner rather than later.

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nadella took the reins in 2014 and the stock has 10x’d since then. In the same timeframe, the sp500 has 2.5x’d. Sounds pretty successful to me?

Stock price going up is not the success criterion for a business. Making money is. And Microsoft's decisions are undermining their ability to make money in the future, which makes them bad decisions even if the stock price has gone up or if they make more money in the short term.

If the market agreed, the stock wouldn’t go up.

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#186

The deeper problem is that Microsoft keeps trying to solve GUI consistency at the framework layer instead of the design system layer. WinForms, WPF, UWP, WinUI -- each one a new framework, each one eventually abandoned. Apple solved this by treating the design system as the product and letting the framework be invisible. Microsoft has it backwards every time.

> Apple solved this

This comment written before Tahoe

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#187
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your post is touching on a key question: why write a Windows-specific app? I'm a developer who has built and published several apps. I want the biggest possible audience for those apps. Why would I limit those apps to Windows? (Or even to any single platform/OS?) Web apps work everywhere. The web has grown increasingly powerful and capable. Why would I invest in a technology that can only run on a single OS? Doesn't…

> Web apps work everywhere. The web has grown increasingly powerful and capable. Why would I invest in a technology that can only run on a single OS? There are other options besides "web app" and "only one OS". A cross platform app which uses something like GTK or QT will be a massively better experience for your users, one a web app cannot hope to equal.

[dead]

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#188
post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DOM is very ill-suited for most UI. Too complex and lots of missing features. It’s a whole bag of unneeded code and the resulting UI doesn’t fit anywhere.

> The DOM is very ill-suited for most UI. Too complex and lots of missing features Can you expand on this, because I'm not seeing it myself. The DOM, html+css is very flexible. It easily encompasses most UI. Most UI is some kind of data display, so lists, trees, tables, forms. The need for JS might be what you're complaining about. I think we might be stuck with it as a UI control language forever.

The DOM(and CSS) is primarily built for documents and forms, even with the latest addition like Flexbox or Grid layouts. It is closer to typesetting tools like troff, latex, texinfo than any UI engines you can think of. And some that are not needed, like the difference between , , , ,...

Also with most GUI frameworks, there's some difference between widgets like label, button, menu, checkbox,... and containers that does layout management. And there are not a lot of elements in both sets. This is the reason why React Native has a very sparse components library. With simpler implementation, you have a simpler rendering path, and the developer have less elements to deal with.

Also some have ready-made implementation of really useful widgets, like tree, grids, tables, lists, and other dynamic things. You can find libraries for those on the web, but the web implementation of scrollable container is janky.

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#189

> WPF was good As someone who saw what impact WPF had on average users running average hardware in the late 2000s to early 2010s, I disagree. In 2011, my brother was in seminary, using an average Windows Vista-era laptop that he had been given in 2008. When he was home for Christmas in 2011, we were talking about his laptop, and he told me that the Logos Bible software ran sluggishly on that laptop. He said something…

I had the misfortune of writing a complicated WPF app from scratch circa 2010-2011. Performance using the WPF widgets was terrible compared to HTML/Javascript/Blink; we ended throwing away most of the WPF code other than the main shell and a few dialogs, reimplementing the importantant stuff with immediate-mode Direct3D/Direct2D to get the necessary speed.

I recall wasting a lot of time staring at decompiled .NET bytecode trying to understand how to work around many problems with it, and it was clear from the decompiler output that WPF's architecture was awful...

Re: Microsoft hasn't had a coherent GUI strategy since Petzold

#190

The deeper problem is that Microsoft keeps trying to solve GUI consistency at the framework layer instead of the design system layer. WinForms, WPF, UWP, WinUI -- each one a new framework, each one eventually abandoned. Apple solved this by treating the design system as the product and letting the framework be invisible. Microsoft has it backwards every time.

Being a 70's child, in computing since the mid 80s you made me almost spill my Monday coffee.

What a laugh, do you want the examples on Apple's side?

Post reply on HN