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

21–30 of 290 posts

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

#21

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

lateforwork wrote: post #18
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/…

> 1995-2000 Microsoft's user interfaces were quite tasteful Only because they copied NeXTSTEP. Those 3D beveled controls originated in NeXTSTSP. In Windows, ctl3d.dll added raised and sunken 3D-looking buttons, beveled text boxes, group boxes with depth, a light-source illusion using highlight and shadow, all copied from NeXTSTEP.

That’s an odd way to spell Motif.

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

#22

Post by delecti »

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…

I don't think openness to feedback is the main metric, but rather ability to objectively measure outcomes. It's just harder to objectively measure usability than the presence or absence of a bug or performance problem.

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

#23

Post by DaiPlusPlus »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #10
VerifiedReports wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. I always cite XP as being Windows's peak, but I forgot that it shipped with their insulting Fisher-Price motif enabled by default. Step 1 was to switch the UI to "classic" (essentially Windows 95) mode, and all was well. Windows 95 is a great case study because with that release, Microsoft did more for GUIs than Apple did through the entire decade of the '90s... and beyond. All of it is now out the window (pun i…

I really liked XP (and 7) because for me, having a capable theming engine built in that didn't take a ton of extra resources or cause instability (unlike Stardock's WindowBlinds) was a real value add. There were some absolutely gorgeous third party XP/Vista/7 themes on sites like DeviantArt that worked extremely well within the limits of the engine, had a unique look and feel, and were just as usable as the "classic"…

The engine itself isn’t gutted - it’s full of functionality that was never lost. MS just (correctly) reasoned that transparency effects in the UI - introduced in Vista simply to show-off the capabilities of the DWM compositor - ultimately detract from a good UI.

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

#24

Post by tbossanova »

khazhoux wrote: post #17

This part stands out to me: > The Windows 95 user interface design team was formed in October, 1992... The number of people oscillated during the project but was approximately twelve. The software developers dedicated to implementing the user interface accounted for another twelve or so people I still don't understand what happened starting around 2010-ish (from my observations at the time) that we went from being ab…

Yes and with all these huge and siloed teams you end up with no consistency even within a single app

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

#25

Post by okanat »

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/…

> Microsoft Office 2007 ribbon

Ribbon also has a similar research behind it, just like Windows 95. For what they designed it, allowing beginners to discover all the functionality that's available, it works perfectly.

I think most of the complaints from the tech circles are completely unfounded in reality. Many non-tech people and younger ones actually prefer using Ribbon. I also like it since it is very tastefully made for Office. 2010 was my favorite Office UI. It actually doesn't get rid of shortcuts either. Most of the Office 2003 ones were preserved to not break the workflow of power users.

Where Ribbon doesn't work is when you take out the contextual activation out of it. Most companies copied it in a very stupid way. They just copied how it looks. The way it is implemented in Sibelius, WinDBG or PDFXChange is very bad.

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

#26

Post by layer8 »

PunchyHamster wrote: post #19
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 think there is distinction there between look and functionality. They were functionally just fine; good even compared to some modern abominations. But the look was just plain and ugly, even compared to some alternatives at the time. > Things started going downhill, in my opinion, with the Windows XP "Fisher-Price" Luna interface and the Microsoft Office 2007 ribbon. Yeah I just ran it with 2000-compatible look; sti…

Windows 95 was a vast improvement in looks over 3.x. Of course tastes differ, but I found it very aesthetic, not ugly at all, and used the classic look until Windows 7 EOLd.

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

#27

Post by titzer »

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 OS and website designers have over me. They can just sneak into my house and rearrange my furniture on a whim. Even if it sucks, I would adapt to it if it stayed constant! Instead I both hate it and can't learn it, because everything is different and keeps changing when I least expect it.

At this point my brain has given into learned helplessness and won't retain much of anything at all, but it's next-level figured out that it's useless.

Designers seem to have a bad track record, and it's getting worse.

Sorry, designers.

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

#28

Post by titzer »

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…

To be fair, Apple has always had a penchant for removing important features because they don't like how they look. I cannot count how many times I got a CD/DVD stuck in a Mac, and due to a lack of physical eject button and the software eject button not working, resorted to the emergency eject sequences. Just put a button to eject the disk, ffs.

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

#29

Post by titzer »

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.

Sadly, it won't be the last time you'll feel that angry passion.

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

#30

Post by titzer »

khazhoux wrote: post #17

This part stands out to me: > The Windows 95 user interface design team was formed in October, 1992... The number of people oscillated during the project but was approximately twelve. The software developers dedicated to implementing the user interface accounted for another twelve or so people I still don't understand what happened starting around 2010-ish (from my observations at the time) that we went from being ab…

Microsoft had thousands of people working on Windows. Sun Microsystems had thousands of people working on Java.
Post reply on HN