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

251–260 of 290 posts

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

#251

Post by kmeisthax »

baq wrote: post #192
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 not having taste the liquid glass designers (and probably their managers and design vps) should be repeatedly punched in the face with that video

What's doubly-insulting about Liquid Glass is that Windows Vista did the glass thing better. Aero rivaled mid-2000s Aqua in design chops, and in some ways did a better job of showing off what GPU compositing could do. But most importantly Microsoft actually understood that text on glass needs loads of background protection, damn it.

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

#252

Post by benj111 »

tavavex wrote: post #142
Sharlin wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Textbook case of form over function. Either an engineering constraint forced by the design and deemed an acceptable trade-off by higher-ups, or maybe more likely, the designer just thought a visible charging port would’ve ruined their design.

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…

So if they're reusing the shell, they passed the savings on to customers right?

If this were a £10 mouse then this excuse might be valid, but it isn't.

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

#253

Post by benj111 »

alexdbird wrote: post #165
gerdesj wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had to get printing working for a family member on an Apple tablet. I'm not an Apple jockey so it took me a while to sort out and I've being using computers since 1980 and consulting since 1995. You tap an icon that looks like the outline of a rectangle with an arrow pointing up. Then you tap the name of the printer. Then you tap another rectangle with an up arrow and then tap the word "Print". I may have…

It's called the Action icon, a generalisation of its original Share meaning. It's used throughout the Apple ecosystem so knowing that's where actions live is not a big expectation. You've mangled the steps. You only press one Action icon in this sequence, then you select Print, then you need to select the printer and any other options, then you tap Print. Which of these steps do you think 'abstruse'? Are you suggesti…

There's a printer icon in windows and *nix. Many icons represent things that have wildly different forms. People and cars look different, but road signs manage to portray these things.

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

#254

Post by benj111 »

hakfoo wrote: post #133
zozbot234 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows Explorer supports its own equivalent to the "Share" menu, dubbed "Send To". It was there already in the original Windows 9x. Printers are generally not listed though, there is a separate "Print" option instead.

There's a very reasonable argument behind that, though. "Sending" a file to another disc or on the network is non-transformative. At the far end, it's still a file . But "printing" is inherently transformative-- you're expecting to get something clearly not a file (print-to-file pseudo-printers excepted). I can see the desire for minimalism-- having seperate rows for "share/send" and "print" is, well, two seperate ro…

Maybe I've been in Linux land too long but sending a file to a printer seems pretty obvious to me. Yes it's transformative in a way, but you could equally argue that my word document with A4 layout is a digital version of a document, and the print out is equivalent.

To me there seems to be more difference between sending and share. One is pushing something somewhere, the other implies making it available for someone/thing to pull.

I'm not particularly saying you're wrong btw. We are talking metaphors, and there's no 'correct' way to do it.

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

#255

Post by toast0 »

1bpp wrote: post #68
gerdesj wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had to get printing working for a family member on an Apple tablet. I'm not an Apple jockey so it took me a while to sort out and I've being using computers since 1980 and consulting since 1995. You tap an icon that looks like the outline of a rectangle with an arrow pointing up. Then you tap the name of the printer. Then you tap another rectangle with an up arrow and then tap the word "Print". I may have…

Android uses the 'share' icon to represent the same thing, which is maybe a little more legible, but still feels like shoving way too many actions under a confusing modal they shouldn't be in. Even worse when apps implement a custom share dialog.

I usually see the Android share icon with the word share. Apple doesn't often present words with icons, so if you don't already know what the icon means, it's difficult to find out.

Arguably, it's a bit off that you share a document with a printer in order to print it, but I feel like printing is no longer so common as to require a dedicated button everywhere; and printing from a phone still seems like a novelty to me (but I do use it; it feels odd, but useful and I know lots of people have no computer to print from)

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

#256

Post by M95D »

LtWorf wrote: post #243
M95D wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true. Win95 start menu appears instantly. I dare you to prove me wrong. You are probably thinking of Win98 menu where they added IE.

I am thinking of windows 95 with a computer from 1995, in the year 1995. If you use it on a vm today… yeah thanks for not proving anything.

I'm not using a vm. I have an early 2000s computer running several old OSs. In Win98 I replaced the shell with the one from Win95 because it's faster. See 98lite: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_remastering#98lite

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

#257

Post by userbinator »

askvictor wrote: post #157
f1shy wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Cycling the battery continuously is worse for lifespan.

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

#258

Post by wtetzner »

alexdbird wrote: post #165
gerdesj wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently had to get printing working for a family member on an Apple tablet. I'm not an Apple jockey so it took me a while to sort out and I've being using computers since 1980 and consulting since 1995. You tap an icon that looks like the outline of a rectangle with an arrow pointing up. Then you tap the name of the printer. Then you tap another rectangle with an up arrow and then tap the word "Print". I may have…

It's called the Action icon, a generalisation of its original Share meaning. It's used throughout the Apple ecosystem so knowing that's where actions live is not a big expectation. You've mangled the steps. You only press one Action icon in this sequence, then you select Print, then you need to select the printer and any other options, then you tap Print. Which of these steps do you think 'abstruse'? Are you suggesti…

We've had clear, legible printer icons for decades.

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

#259

Post by LtWorf »

M95D wrote: post #256
LtWorf wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am thinking of windows 95 with a computer from 1995, in the year 1995. If you use it on a vm today… yeah thanks for not proving anything.

I'm not using a vm. I have an early 2000s computer running several old OSs. In Win98 I replaced the shell with the one from Win95 because it's faster. See 98lite: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_remastering#98lite

I am not a great mathematical genius but I suspect that "early 2000s" came several years after 1995. Correct?

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

#260

Post by just6979 »

leoc wrote: post #234
throw_away_623 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> I think it was actually more related to aesthetic "icks" by the designers, because people would have disconnected the cable if it was in the way. A lot of people really will just anxiously leave the cable in the whole time if given the opportunity. I have a wired/wireless Logitech mouse and I confess that I hardly ever remove the cable. Between this, and the space and connector issues of adding a "normal" cable con…

Nobody leaves the cables attached. Except wanna be pro gamers who think a couple milliseconds will help them more than practice to "git gud". Every mouse I have is wireless, and I almost never use them plugged in, except for the one on the server that get used so rarely it's self-discharged should probably be wired but I simply don't have any wired ones left. Just plug them in overnight every once in a while, golden.
Post reply on HN