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

Windows 95 UI Design

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 312 posts

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#261

Post by kps »

Touche wrote: post #219
erikpukinskis wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Force touch is the best evidence we have that designers have lost their power at Apple. The best thing Steve Jobs did was hire serious designers and defend their ideas against the rest of the organization. That’s clearly not happening anymore. My guess is that “Designer at Apple” became such a desirable title that the design roles have been taken over by wannabees.

I'm pretty sure invisible UI started very much while Jobs was in power. Hiding the scrollbar, for example. I think it's quite a myth that Jobs knew good design. Jobs had a fetish for minimalism. For simple, single use, UIs that's often a good choice. I think that's what made iPods and the first generations of iPhones so well designed. But as smartphones have transitioned into being primary use devices with greater ab…

Yes, the original Mac had invisible UI: the double click. It's an undiscoverable operation that people had to be taught, and invented so that Jobs could squeeze two operations onto one button because one button looked cleaner.

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#262

Post by ldng »

jopsen wrote: post #189
eitland wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is actually a good point. Simple stuff might have become simpler. That said I am firmly in the "we lost something between 95 and here" camp for now. And to while it does explain why pads are different it doesn't explain why we needed to mess up the desktop in the process.

And the market for simple stuff that is simple to do is a lot larger than the desktop market. That's probably what we learned from the iPhone.

Simple UI is better when you have consumer grade "simple" but problems starts when complex pro app start to do "simple" and you get "simplistic stupid"

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#263

Post by oneeyedpigeon »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #229
Touche wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure invisible UI started very much while Jobs was in power. Hiding the scrollbar, for example. I think it's quite a myth that Jobs knew good design. Jobs had a fetish for minimalism. For simple, single use, UIs that's often a good choice. I think that's what made iPods and the first generations of iPhones so well designed. But as smartphones have transitioned into being primary use devices with greater ab…

Well, they didn't hide the scrollbar on desktop until Lion, at which point Steve was in quite poor health. On mobile, and particularly on screens the size of the original iPhone, hiding the scrollbar is a necessary tradeoff for screen real-estate. It also doesn't necessarily hurt usability if you know the exact screen size you're designing for, and can ensure elements are never fully cut off on your initial view.

It hurts usability in several ways. For example, you can’t click on an iOS scrollbar to jump to a specific part of the document. Nor can you use it as an instant reference to determine how long the document is.

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#264

Post by Wowfunhappy »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #263
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, they didn't hide the scrollbar on desktop until Lion, at which point Steve was in quite poor health. On mobile, and particularly on screens the size of the original iPhone, hiding the scrollbar is a necessary tradeoff for screen real-estate. It also doesn't necessarily hurt usability if you know the exact screen size you're designing for, and can ensure elements are never fully cut off on your initial view.

It hurts usability in several ways. For example, you can’t click on an iOS scrollbar to jump to a specific part of the document. Nor can you use it as an instant reference to determine how long the document is.

> For example, you can’t click on an iOS scrollbar to jump to a specific part of the document.

How would you propose doing that on a 3.5" screen without a mouse or stylus?

> Nor can you use it as an instant reference to determine how long the document is.

You scroll the screen a tiny bit and the scrollbar pops up. Again, keep the size of the screen in mind—making the scrollbar persistent would be a poor use of space.

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#265

Post by donatj »

csomar wrote: post #177

Here is something else: The interface was "responsive". And I don't mean the responsive designs we have today for HTML but that when you click a button, you get a "response" very fast from the monitor. Now, with these new interfaces and stuff, most of them are so lag-y that you can notice them with your eyes. It's very frustrating. I tried Bisq a couple days ago. The application was apparently made with Electron and…

Photoshops "New" dialog in newer versions takes seconds to show up. It's horrific. Someone should get fired. I am both distracted and irritated by it every time I create a new file.

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#266

Post by xcv321 »

chinesempire wrote: post #193
xcv321 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you probably weren't using computers back in the Win 9x days. For us who remember it, Windows 95 is synonymous with BSOD.

I don't like to downvote comments, but this one is particularly bad. First of all, BSOD where not that common, and for sure they are not what all of "us" remember about Windows 95. Secondly, Amiga and Mac had their own version of the BSOD, there were just far less Amiga and Mac around. Third: Windows 95 bootstrapped the PC gaming era, having the GUI code in the Kernel (for performance reasons) and not having the WHQL…

What an absurd overreaction. Hackernews is such a weak overly hypersensitive community. Yes I'm fully aware that instability was common between Mac and Windows at that time. I sincerely apologize for the irreparable emotional harm from my cruel vicious hateful comment about Windows 95 BSOD. Yes I know that Mac and Windows were both notoriously unstable back then. I wasted many hours of youth dealing with Win95 bullshit, and I know that it was nearly as bad with Mac. We were forced to deal with a lot of crap in the 90s.

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#267

Post by tjoff »

sdegutis wrote: post #250
deanCommie wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. I feel like the world is taking crazy pills. Windows 7 was gorgeous. Windows 8 was a mess but at least the were trying to do something bold with consistency with their Windows Phone Look and Feel. Then Windows 10 shipped and I thought I got some pre alpha developer build accidentally, and it just... Never updated. I've heard iOS be criticized for being overly flat these days but I just got an iPad and foun…

Windows 3's design was a first shot. Windows 95 was extremely polished and well done. Windows XP was a response to PCs becoming mainstream and figuring what the everyman wanted was more flair and fashion. Windows 7 was a response to desktop Linux (Compiz et al.) capturing people's imaginations. Windows 8 was a response to iOS while trying to avoid Apple's skeuomorphism patents (fortunately). Windows 10 was realizing…

I hope Compiz et al didn't inspire anyone, the low point of linux UIs (and that is saying plenty!).

Thankfully Microsoft showed restraint. Windows Vista got a GPU accelerated 3D workspace but the only real showcase for it was the very gimmicky and useless win+tab feature.

For me the savior of Linux is the niche tiling window managers.

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#268

Post by donatj »

flowerlad wrote: post #231
deanCommie wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. I feel like the world is taking crazy pills. Windows 7 was gorgeous. Windows 8 was a mess but at least the were trying to do something bold with consistency with their Windows Phone Look and Feel. Then Windows 10 shipped and I thought I got some pre alpha developer build accidentally, and it just... Never updated. I've heard iOS be criticized for being overly flat these days but I just got an iPad and foun…

Take a look at this iOS critique https://uxcritique.tumblr.com/ To me Windows XP’s look & feel was among the best. Except for the fat Window title bar.

XP was playschool. Eww. Windows 2k was great however.

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#269

Post by Wowfunhappy »

kps wrote: post #261
Touche wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure invisible UI started very much while Jobs was in power. Hiding the scrollbar, for example. I think it's quite a myth that Jobs knew good design. Jobs had a fetish for minimalism. For simple, single use, UIs that's often a good choice. I think that's what made iPods and the first generations of iPhones so well designed. But as smartphones have transitioned into being primary use devices with greater ab…

Yes, the original Mac had invisible UI: the double click. It's an undiscoverable operation that people had to be taught, and invented so that Jobs could squeeze two operations onto one button because one button looked cleaner.

Were two button mice even around when the original Mac was introduced? It might not have been due to aesthetics.

Re: Windows 95 UI Design

#270

Post by zouhair »

RodgerTheGreat wrote: post #4

A generation was raised on usable designs which clearly communicated interactability with a consistent visual language. It is only natural that they would come to think of computers as inherently ordered, understandable devices. Machines had always been this way. It was obvious to this new generation that the affordances of youth were purely redundant. Clutter. Overhead. Junk! Widget by widget, pixel by pixel, bevels…

I hate Material Design with a passion.
Post reply on HN