Satya Nadella Appointed Microsoft CEO as Bill Gates Shifts from Chairman to 'Technology Advisor'

[knewsom]

The point is that we are discussing a critique of an interface and usability here, any such critique is useless if you it's immediately discredited with a "the user is stupid" remark. It gets you no where.

I never said the user was stupid - only lacking in frame of reference. We cannot continue to design software and interfaces for people who lack a frame of reference, because for people who HAVE a frame of reference, it can actually be MORE difficult to use.

The point I'm making is not "nurr stupid usrz," it's that the language of interaction changes over time, and Windows 8.1 is a little ahead of the curve on that front - that's why it's got such mixed reviews. Some people, who speak that language, or enjoy learning new languages, LOVE it (me). Others, who don't speak the language or don't enjoy learning new ones (Gudi), HATE it because they find it pretentious. Well, as with many things based on pretense, it only makes sense if you're "in on it". ...and he doesn't feel "in on it". Like I said, MS was ahead of the curve. That's a double-edged sword, but it typically pays off in the long run.

 

[Renzatic]

That also wasn't a part of Windows during the days of record empty disc sales.

It's been around since XP. Like has been said before, what you're looking at are the granular settings there for people who really know what the hell they're doing. The basic process to burn media onto a CD from XP on goes something like...

- Pop in blank CD

-Windows identifies blank CD, gives you option to write to it. Blank Explorer folder pops up.

-Drag and drop media you want to burn into blank Explorer window.

-Hit "write these files to CD" button.

-Pop up comes up asking what you want to name the CD. Type name, hit next, watch it burn.

It's roughly as easy to burn a disc in XP as it is in Lion, which was the last OSX version I used to write to a disc.

 

[subsonix]

I never said the user was stupid - only lacking in frame of reference. We cannot continue to design software and interfaces for people who lack a frame of reference, because for people who HAVE a frame of reference, it can actually be MORE difficult to use.

True, but above that there is a study of usability and interfaces, and a degree to that a interface can aid in some task and help avoids mistakes. NNGroup is reputable in this field, and actually knows this stuff.

 

[knewsom]

True, but above that there is a study of usability and interfaces, and a degree to that a interface can aid in some task and help avoids mistakes. NNGroup is reputable in this field, and actually knows this stuff.

No, it's not a study, but an analysis - and one based on a false premise as I detailed. As reputable as they are, they represent an outdated design language, which is why Windows 8 seems alien and bad to them.

 

[Liquorpuki]

It could be hypocritical if the argument is made to support a vague or amorphous point, but it doesn't have to be. Comparing the Xerox efforts to the Mac, it's easy to see how far Apple advanced the art of the GUI over the earlier work. It is much more difficult to argue that Microsoft advanced the art created by Apple with Windows.

Gudi's point was vague and amorphous. And he wasn't talking about art, he was talking about commercial success.

 

[subsonix]

No, it's not a study, but an analysis - and one based on a false premise as I detailed. As reputable as they are, they represent an outdated design language, which is why Windows 8 seems alien and bad to them.

I know you detailed it, but based on your point of view only. So again, it's being put against their reputation and experience. I wouldn't say that they represent or prefer any specific "design language" it's more abstract than that.

I think perhaps the author was either a bit preemtive with his review, or just doesn't like any sort of change. In any case, I'm not so sure it qualifies as a "scientific study", since much of it is subjective and completely ignores factual information as I've pointed out.

I found this part here humorous for example, their view is subjective but yours is factual information. Ok, got it.

 

[Renzatic]

No, it's not a study, but an analysis - and one based on a false premise as I detailed. As reputable as they are, they represent an outdated design language, which is why Windows 8 seems alien and bad to them.

It's right and it's wrong. Every one of us here who doesn't have a problem with and/or genuinely like Windows 8 will always have that one caveat "...so long as you don't use Metro apps". That's the big bug bear with it. As long as you're using desktop apps, the Start screen is nothing more than a really big app launcher and search base. It works beautifully. But when you introduce Metro apps into the mix, you're suddenly finding yourself dealing with two environments on the same computer that work completely differently from each other.

And since using Metro is presented as a default, rather than an option, it's bound to confuse people who don't know exactly what they're doing.

 

[IJ Reilly]

But the initial argument gudi made was that Apple was first.

And when they weren't first. They were still first because they were what popularized it.

in his statement, The Xerox wasn't technically the first because it was Apple that popularized it, so they should get credit for being first.

its completely irrelevant to him that Xerox had their products out first since it didn't have mass appeal.

The counter argument that everyone else is saying, is that it's hogwash. First to invent something is first to invent something, regardless of popular appeal.

Apple might have been the first company to mass market a PC with a GUI and mouse to the average consumer of the time. But they were NOT the first with a GUI and a mouse. Doesn't discount what they did do for the industry.

Right, this is why I am not very interested in merely "technical" arguments about who did something "first." Typically these arguments are highly reductive and don't prove anything very useful.

 

[LordVic]

Right, this is why I am not very interested in merely "technical" arguments about who did something "first." Typically these arguments are highly reductive and don't prove anything very useful.

I know. Ive been trying NOT to respond to him. TRYING REALLY REALLY HARD

but sometimes, it just goes on and on, and it's not him (or others like him) i want to correct. They stick their fingers in their ears like good little 3 year olds and scream "NANANANANANANA" to avoid listening to you.

But, it's unfortunate the people who come to read, lurk and actually LEARN who might read that sort of posting and think it's correct.

its for them we argue. Not for gudi.

 

[knewsom]

I know you detailed it, but based on your point of view only. So again, it's being put against their reputation and experience. I wouldn't say that they represent or prefer any specific "design language" it's more abstract than that.



I found this part here humorous for example, their view is subjective but yours is factual information. Ok, got it.

Both of our VIEWS are subjective. ...but the author has some either incorrect or out of date information, as I said. I can open a number of individual windows in Windows Explorer, so I have no idea what he's talking about with that "single window" stuff.

What I'm trying to point out is in fact quite abstract. The author's views on UI design are oriented towards people with a specific set of interaction guidelines, or very little frame of reference at all. Windows 8 is directed at people with a newer revision of those guidelines, and a more updated frame of reference.

...and "oh, well he's reputable so if you disagree with him you're wrong" is an argument beneath you, sir.

It's right and it's wrong. Every one of us here who doesn't have a problem with and/or genuinely like Windows 8 will always have that one caveat "...so long as you don't use Metro apps". That's the big bug bear with it. As long as you're using desktop apps, the Start screen is nothing more than a really big app launcher and search base. It works beautifully. But when you introduce Metro apps into the mix, you're suddenly finding yourself dealing with two environments on the same computer that work completely differently from each other.

And since using Metro is presented as a default, rather than an option, it's bound to confuse people who don't know exactly what they're doing.

Ah, Metro apps. I use a few now and then. I do think they're much better for touch than desktop use - I don't have a touchscreen desktop either, so for me they're rather pointless. They sure look purdy though.

I do agree that there are essentially two environments, and that Metro apps work fundamentally differently than the older style - and it's very interesting to see them on a splitscreen, multitasking! I kinda like that I can choose whether I want to use a Metro (touch) interface for apps or keyboard and mouse interface. If I had a touchscreen, I'd probably use more Metro apps.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Gudi's point was vague and amorphous. And he wasn't talking about art, he was talking about commercial success.

I am talking about the state of the art, if that makes any difference. Probably at this point it doesn't.

----------

I know. Ive been trying NOT to respond to him. TRYING REALLY REALLY HARD

but sometimes, it just goes on and on, and it's not him (or others like him) i want to correct. They stick their fingers in their ears like good little 3 year olds and scream "NANANANANANANA" to avoid listening to you.

But, it's unfortunate the people who come to read, lurk and actually LEARN who might read that sort of posting and think it's correct.

its for them we argue. Not for gudi.

Fair enough.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Really? Both used essentially the same tech, and neither of them was the first portable digital player afaik, and iPod preceded the Zune, again afaik.

Yes, the iPod came before the Zune, and some of the first digital music players I've seen . . . . I've seen, have Serial ATA ports on them.

The general consensus is to admit that the victor had superior tech, and in the case of the Zune and iPod (like Betamax and VHS) that wasn't so true. They were hideous looking IMHO, but the UI and the accompanying Zune Music software were a nice alternative to stale (at the time) iTunes.

The Zune UI personally was definitely better to use than the click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, iPod.

...

Now, I do agree with you about Toast, it did give you the option to not download those apps which I gladly took advantage of. I hated that the BluRay burning plugin was extra.

It did however, take the guess work out of burning CDs and DVDs on the Mac and the PC. The two advantages I remember off the top of my head were not finalizing a DVD or CD, which the Mac did by default, and being able to burn a video DVD with no menus.

I know. Ive been trying NOT to respond to him. TRYING REALLY REALLY HARD

I agree as well, and there are times when folks will point to FUD to help make their case on other forums. Correcting people is a double edge sword. Sadly, if they'd just look up the information and leave the bias at the table they'd see how slightly off they are.

Ah, Metro apps. I use a few now and then. I do think they're much better for touch than desktop use.....If I had a touchscreen, I'd probably use more Metro apps.

Very well said points, and regardless of what many say, I find the combo of a touch UI and traditional desktop UI to be well suited to a tablet that can hook up to a monitor and keyboard and mouse.

Being able to use a tablet as a touch only device, with touch enabled Metro styles apps like Evernote, IE, Photoshop Touch, Google Now, Dropbox, Skydrive, Facebook, Skype, etc. is REALLY nice. Then being able to plug the tablet into a 27" monitor and get a traditional desktop experience with those same exact apps is lightyears ahead of what many folks may be used to.

If Microsoft can make the transition less jarring they would definitely have something.

Also, yes, being able to have a touch UI on the tablet while the 27" has the desktop UI blew my mind. Definitely would be confusing for many though.

 

[subsonix]

Yes, the iPod came before the Zune, and some of the first digital music players I've seen . . . . I've seen, have Serial ATA ports on them.

The general consensus is to admit that the victor had superior tech, and in the case of the Zune and iPod (like Betamax and VHS) that wasn't so true. They were hideous looking IMHO, but the UI and the accompanying Zune Music software were a nice alternative to stale (at the time) iTunes.

The Zune UI personally was definitely better to use than the click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, click, scroll, iPod.

I'm sorry I may be missing your point here, wasn't it: Zune was first, had superior tech, but was defeated by the lesser iPod due to clever marketing?

That is, that Zune was somehow Betamax, and iPod like VHS. If that's not the case then I have no idea what you were talking about. I merely pointed out that underneath, both of these are basically, a codec an SoC and some Flash memory and iPod came before Zune, so the Betamax/VHS analogy doesn't work, at all..

 

[Digital Skunk]

.....

No, it was iPod first with limited UI, Zune second with superior UI trying to upset the iPod's dominance.

The inside hardware is a moot point. Betamax and VHS were both magnetic tape.

It first well if you stop trying to split hairs, I could bring up U-matic to make a stink, but most folks that remember the format wars will get the point.

It's an analogy.

 

[LordVic]

And the iPod UI was also lifted directly from Creative labs who was using the UI previously on their MP3 players that were out before the iPod.

(if we want to get factual)

 

[subsonix]

No, it was iPod first with limited UI, Zune second with superior UI trying to upset the iPod's dominance.

It's an analogy.

Well, besides the Zune there were a handful of other mp3 players available, and there were also more than one iPod model released from Apple.

The inside hardware is a moot point. Betamax and VHS were both magnetic tape.

It first well if you stop trying to split hairs, I could bring up U-matic to make a stink, but most folks that remember the format wars will get the point.

How can it be, Betamax was said to be superior on technical grounds afaik. But going with your analogy, it's like Betamax vs VHS except the defining traits of the Betamax vs VHS conflict. Never mind, let leave this.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Well, besides the Zune there were a handful of other mp3 players available, and there were also more than one iPod model released from Apple.

True, but the main Zune was always compared to the iPod Classic.

There was a Zune Touch, but I can't speak on it. I would bet that it wouldn't hold a candle to the iPod Touch running iOS though, given that iOS dominated until Android reached maturity.

 

[Gudi]

And yes, I STILL get called to fix my parents and grandparents' computers. I can't wait until my kid can take over such duties and I can pretend to know nothing about computers so he'll fix them while I read a book or something.

So you feel the need for computers to be usable without help by the elderly.

People like the old man in the video you posted do not represent a growth market for Microsoft. People like me do. I generally make the purchasing decisions for electronics in my house.

I have a degree in computer science and even I rather want to use a computer which is easier to use. The market growth is with user-friendly iPads, single taskingly showing only one full-screen app at a time and in doing so drastically reducing any possibility of wrong usage.

Microsoft is trying to steer customers like that away from keyboards and mice and towards TOUCH.

You got that wrong. Microsoft its losing its costumers to touch-based iOS and Android devices. They are not the active part in this development.

Which he'd know if he went into a Microsoft store and spoke with someone there.

Microsoft Stores do not exist outside of Microland. And they are another example of Microsoft copying Apple.

...but if he doesn't go that route and instead buys a Mac? They still win, since he'll probably buy Office anyway.

Leaving Windows is only the first step to leaving all of Microsoft behind you. Office can't win on a Mac. All the iWork apps are now free (with new hardware) on the AppStore. How long till they come preinstalled? FREE versus 139 EUR for Office for Mac Home & Student. I anticipate Office for Mac to be discontinued due to dwindling demand in the next two years.

People are dumb enough already, do we need to treat everyone like complete novices when it comes to computers and touch interfaces?

Yes.

 

[Liquorpuki]

I am talking about the state of the art, if that makes any difference. Probably at this point it doesn't.

I get your point and it's valid. But Michael Goff was originally responding to Gudi. He wasn't qualifying innovation by art. He was qualifying it by who was first to market, and then later by commercial success.

 

[bend]

Gates spends his first day back installing Windows 8

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2014/02/gates-spends-entire-first-day-back-in-office-trying-to-install-windows-81.html

 

[Michael Goff]

That point is not disputed, but I don't think it's merely theoretical to say that the Mac was the difference maker in this market. It comes down to how you define what matters. Meanwhile, it is also worth mentioning that the pointing device was not even invented at Xerox, it was something Douglas Englebart worked out years earlier. Proper credit where it is due.

Yep.

My point was to the guy who seems to think Apple invented everything. You're being reasonable, some others aren't capable or that.

 

[bumblebritches5]

Interesting Mac rumor....

News about Apple's biggest competitor getting a new CEO is definitely Apple news as well.

 

[Michael Goff]

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2014/02/gates-spends-entire-first-day-back-in-office-trying-to-install-windows-81.html

Wow, shows that even supposed computer geniuses sometimes have trouble with the smallest things.

 

[uknowimright]

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/2014/02/gates-spends-entire-first-day-back-in-office-trying-to-install-windows-81.html

what a poor attempt at an Onion like article

 

[knewsom]

wordswordswords

We could just keep repeating ourselves, but that's boring.

*shrug* Vote with your pocketbook. I'll vote with mine. I know several individuals like you still using XP on a Pentium 4 because they thought it was the pinnacle and nothing else was necessary. Have fun with that.