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

The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

dl.acm.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 290 posts

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#151

Post by saratogacx »

dingaling wrote: post #139
etbebl wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know the ribbon can be collapsed so that it behaves more like a drop-down menu, right?

It doesn't really act that way, as (1) it can't be accessed with keyboard shortcuts and (2) it's difficult to scan for the desired feature as it's a visual jumble of buttons and text. Oh, and it might not be visible! Sometimes features can only be found in pop-out dialogs. Having used Office products for 30+, my most-used feature of the Ribbon is Search, because I don't have time to waste hunting through a poorly-org…

To your (1), if you tap Alt all of the alt keys current available show up next to their associated buttons. (Top level menu). Hit the letter for where you want to go and it than will show you the next set of alt keys (available items on the ribbon itself). You can also use the arrows to move around the menus or tabs when in this mode. It isn't obvious but the ribbon, as office implemented it, is very keyboard accessible.

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#152

Post by sandermvanvliet »

f1shy wrote: post #131
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll also give the opinion that Apple consistently creates some absolutely crap designs and when they do this, release something really really mind mindbogglingly stupid that it should be embarrassing they are instead met with applause on the "amazing design". It's a tiresome pattern repeated for decades now. eg. The 'breathing status light' that lit up the room at night due to extreme brightness which meant every ma…

> release something really really mind mindbogglingly stupid that it should be embarrassing I’m still trying to understand who came with the idea of charging the mouse from under, instead of from a position that would allow to use the mouse while charging…

Let me introduce you to the world of _devices for keeping small kids asleep_.

For whatever reason they won’t work when hooked up to a charger and of course the moment you need them most the batteries have gone dead so you must charge…

At this point I can’t help but think that the people who design these things really hate parents

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#153

Post by reddalo »

glenstein wrote: post #150
linguae wrote: post #15

Steve Jobs is famous for his 1996 quote about Microsoft not having taste ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiOzGI4MqSU ). I disagree; as much as I love the classic Mac OS and Jobs-era Mac OS X, and despite my feelings about Microsoft's monopolistic behavior, 1995-2000 Microsoft's user interfaces were quite tasteful, in my opinion, and this was Microsoft's most tasteful period. I have fond memories of Windows 95/NT 4/…

Amazing you say that because I almost posted that comment in response to that same clip in another HN thread, for the same reason. There's a tight integration between style, performance, and design on the Windows 95 and 98 that then now feels more like "true" Windows than anything since. I think Jobs was right about Microsoft later on, but they certainly had taste during their peak.

Performance started going downhill with Windows XP, and then even more with Windows Vista.

Modern Windows doesn't feel snappy anymore, even thought we have the most powerful computers we've ever had.

Sometimes I use some old Win32 apps, and they feel so responsive and light...

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#154

Post by josephg »

virtue3 wrote: post #11
VerifiedReports wrote: post #3

Look how crisp, professional, and usable it all is. This is a very good write-up. There's no way this level of testing and dedication could have resulted in the execrable shitshow that is Windows today. Mac OS is going backward with accelerating speed, too. They had just started to recover from Jony Ive when they put a packaging designer in charge of UI... resulting in the "Liquid Glass" debacle, and all the other in…

I hate liquid glass with a burning passion. I've never understood why people get so irritated at design changes until now.

Ugh I couldn't agree more. The new macos feels like a step backwards on many fronts. I'm going to delay updating my mac for as long as I can.

I wonder if its nearly time to say goodbye to the apple ecosystem. Those framework laptops look snazzy.

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#155

Post by BrenBarn »

hnthrowaway0315 wrote: post #4

I think Windows 95/2000 and the contemporary MacOS (including the then future MacOS X) have the best UI in everything I used in my 30+ years of tech life. I sincerely hope that one day we could go back to that road. If you want that achieved, please support me to join Apple/Microsoft to become the UI boss, fire all flat-design people and hire a small team to implement the older UI, then give a few passionate talks on…

> I think Windows 95/2000 and the contemporary MacOS (including the then future MacOS X) have the best UI in everything I used in my 30+ years of tech life.

Agreed. I do wonder how much of it is personal, in that that UI hit at a certain formative time in my life. But ever since then it's been the benchmark that I evaluate all other UIs by. The lack of a "classic" mode in Win10 was one thing that motivated me to switch fully to Linux. To make the switch, I spent a good amount of time trawling the themes to find one that mimicks the look of Win95/95/2000. (The one I use is a KDE theme called "Reactionary".)

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#156

Post by phendrenad2 »

VerifiedReports wrote: post #3

Look how crisp, professional, and usable it all is. This is a very good write-up. There's no way this level of testing and dedication could have resulted in the execrable shitshow that is Windows today. Mac OS is going backward with accelerating speed, too. They had just started to recover from Jony Ive when they put a packaging designer in charge of UI... resulting in the "Liquid Glass" debacle, and all the other in…

GUIs used to be designed by power users, who would start with an advanced design and strip it down to a simple version the average user could use. Now GUIs are designed by average users who have no idea what to do with advanced features, because they're stuck thinking about the GUI as an average user does.

Power users understand many different levels. Beginner/average -> professional -> advanced -> power user. But the average designers nowadays only understand two things: average, and everything beyond that. This is why professional, advanced, and obscure features are all just one long-press away - they literally have no idea which category each feature falls into, so they're all equally valid.

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#157

Post by askvictor »

f1shy wrote: post #131
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll also give the opinion that Apple consistently creates some absolutely crap designs and when they do this, release something really really mind mindbogglingly stupid that it should be embarrassing they are instead met with applause on the "amazing design". It's a tiresome pattern repeated for decades now. eg. The 'breathing status light' that lit up the room at night due to extreme brightness which meant every ma…

> release something really really mind mindbogglingly stupid that it should be embarrassing I’m still trying to understand who came with the idea of charging the mouse from under, instead of from a position that would allow to use the mouse while charging…

I believe that was intentional, to prevent people using it plugged in, which would mean most people would keep it plugged in all the time, so it wouldn't be a wireless mouse anymore, but also degrade the battery lifespan.

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#158

Post by zelphirkalt »

AnotherGoodName wrote: post #46
linguae wrote: post #15

Steve Jobs is famous for his 1996 quote about Microsoft not having taste ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiOzGI4MqSU ). I disagree; as much as I love the classic Mac OS and Jobs-era Mac OS X, and despite my feelings about Microsoft's monopolistic behavior, 1995-2000 Microsoft's user interfaces were quite tasteful, in my opinion, and this was Microsoft's most tasteful period. I have fond memories of Windows 95/NT 4/…

I'll also give the opinion that Apple consistently creates some absolutely crap designs and when they do this, release something really really mind mindbogglingly stupid that it should be embarrassing they are instead met with applause on the "amazing design". It's a tiresome pattern repeated for decades now. eg. The 'breathing status light' that lit up the room at night due to extreme brightness which meant every ma…

I like the status lights on my old X200 a lot (on/off, battery, disk, wlan I believe, and more). It's a shame we don't have them like that any longer in Thinkpads. We only get one or two LEDs indicating on/off status. But such things need to be done right.

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#159

Post by alexdbird »

throw_away_623 wrote: post #145
tavavex wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the exact reason has never been documented, if you look at that mouse's design, you'll see that its first generation had a regular battery compartment on the bottom. When gen 2 arrived, they fully reused the same shell and only replaced that bottom part to now be an integrated battery with a charging port instead of a compartment for AAs. Moving the charging port would've required a brand new design, since ever…

The reason people talk about the mouse is that it's one of the worst ideas they ever had. At the time, I remember someone claimed that the reason was that they were afraid people could leave it plugged in for convenience. Apple thought that would lead to a worse experience because their mouse was designed to be used wirelessly. I think it was actually more related to aesthetic "icks" by the designers, because people…

Honestly, as a user of the mouse, I think the main reason people talk about the mouse is bike shedding. Charging isn't a problem in actual use, but everyone sure has an opinion on it.

There are plenty of contenders for 'worst ideas they ever had' and this just isn't up there.

Re: The Windows 95 user interface: A case study in usability engineering (1996)

#160

Post by josephg »

titzer wrote: post #27
lateforwork wrote: post #5

Designers tend to be less open to feedback than developers. That, I think, helps explain why flat UI persists even though it has shown usability drawbacks. It also helps explain why overall usability feels like it's declining ever year — for instance, macOS Tahoe seems noticeably worse in usability compared to macOS Sequoia. Does anyone think Apple is going to rush out a release that fixes the excessive rounding of w…

It's all just rearranging deck chairs at this point. I feel like UX designers don't realize that their job should have a natural tailing off as we discover and lock in the good ideas and discard the bad. Even if the ideas aren't that great, users can at least get good at however it does work, if it stays constant. Instead, we just get more dice rolls, eyecandy, and frustration. I for one hate the power dynamic that O…

Part of the problem is that each generation of designers want to leave their mark on the product - often by undoing the work of the last generation of designers. They're not entirely wrong. Design has fashions, like clothes. I enjoy that the industrial design of laptops and phones changes every few years. But good UX isn't good because its fashionable. Good UX doesn't go out of date. They've gotta learn to stop fixing it when its not broken.

Eg, MacOS's new system preferences panel is worse than the old one. And its stupid putting the windows start menu in the middle of the screen, where you can't as easily click it with the mouse.

Post reply on HN