first impression of a stupid design

  • Thread starter Thread starter michail iakovou yos
  • Start date Start date
M

michail iakovou yos

This is the first version of longhorn that had the scroll bar in the start
menu. This is a very bad and ugly design, that when he sees it, gasps in
dismay, and calls it ugly. It is very ugly indeed.

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_5048.asp

Start Menu
Microsoft has changed the Start Menu fairly radically in this build, though
the results are visually challenging. Instead of a pop-up All Programs
sub-menu the All Program entry now triggers a visual change where the All
Programs menu items replace the left side of the Start Menu (Figure). If you
open a folder from there, the menu expands, causing a (gasp) scroll bar to
appear (Figure). Ugly.

http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/lh4058_review_14.jpg
 
Another stupid Start Menu feature is the changing icon at the top of the
open Start Menu. This icon changes in your peripheral vision while you're
trying to focus on where the mouse pointer is at. Motion in the periphery
of a user's vision is specifically recommended against in the design
guidelines for Vista user interface elements on MSDN.

There are many UI elements in Vista that directly violate the UI guidelines
for Vista applications.

Dale
 
OH yes, I have said that the first time I saw that strange thing... very bad
idea.

There are more errors in the start menu, even the fact that they removed the
icons
from, mycomputer, control paner ect, makes you lose time reading through
them
to find what you want, and then you have that changing icon that distracts
you (and even is slow to react).
Then you have the shutdown button that is all wrong.... lol

I can say that every change they made in comparison to the start menu in
windows XP was
a bad one, with the exception perhaps of the search..... that I dont
personally like,
but I can imagine why some people may like it.
 
WRONG!!!

The new start menu is beautifully done, much better than XP!
This is the first version of longhorn that had the scroll bar in the start
menu. This is a very bad and ugly design, that when he sees it, gasps in
dismay, and calls it ugly. It is very ugly indeed.

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_5048.asp

Start Menu
Microsoft has changed the Start Menu fairly radically in this build, though
the results are visually challenging. Instead of a pop-up All Programs
sub-menu the All Program entry now triggers a visual change where the All
Programs menu items replace the left side of the Start Menu (Figure). If you
open a folder from there, the menu expands, causing a (gasp) scroll bar to
appear (Figure). Ugly.

http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/lh4058_review_14.jpg
 
It is not stupid, it is cool.
Another stupid Start Menu feature is the changing icon at the top of the
open Start Menu. This icon changes in your peripheral vision while you're
trying to focus on where the mouse pointer is at. Motion in the periphery
of a user's vision is specifically recommended against in the design
guidelines for Vista user interface elements on MSDN.

There are many UI elements in Vista that directly violate the UI guidelines
for Vista applications.

Dale
 
old news exactly. It is the first interaction of an intelligent human with a
non intelligent
start menu.

It shows where vista was headed with the start menu design. MS should have
listened then, and dumped that design... but unfortunately someone there had
this idea...and MS stuck with it, mostly so vista could look different from
XP, just for the sake of it.

I would like to find this person who had these ideas and explain to him why
his ideas
are incredibly bad.

Do you know who the originator of these gui ideas is?
 
you must have then a third eye on your forehead so you can watch that cute icon
fade on and off... lol

its not cool.. its useless and distracting... The best way was to have the icons next to the words like XP had. Your eye and brain could identify the function in a split second without reading the title of the function and click on it.

This is natural, this is superb design...if only they had 3 options for the start menu,
classic, xp style, and vista style......... then everyone would be happy.

It is not stupid, it is cool.
Another stupid Start Menu feature is the changing icon at the top of the
open Start Menu. This icon changes in your peripheral vision while you're
trying to focus on where the mouse pointer is at. Motion in the periphery
of a user's vision is specifically recommended against in the design
guidelines for Vista user interface elements on MSDN.

There are many UI elements in Vista that directly violate the UI guidelines
for Vista applications.

Dale
 
Its good to trace the mistakes from their origin. History has that function, to make
sure the same mistakes are not repeated.
You prefer to ignore the mistakes and accept everything without a critical mind...

This is a dangerous thing.... a people like that can bring much suffering to the world.
He is stuck in 1993.

Michail

The year is 2007..
 
michail iakovou yos said:
This is the first version of longhorn that had the scroll bar in the start
menu. This is a very bad and ugly design, that when he sees it, gasps in
dismay, and calls it ugly. It is very ugly indeed.

http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/longhorn_5048.asp

Start Menu
Microsoft has changed the Start Menu fairly radically in this build,
though
the results are visually challenging. Instead of a pop-up All Programs
sub-menu the All Program entry now triggers a visual change where the All
Programs menu items replace the left side of the Start Menu (Figure). If
you
open a folder from there, the menu expands, causing a (gasp) scroll bar to
appear (Figure). Ugly.

http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/lh4058_review_14.jpg
Click to expand...

Look on the bright side, at least you can customise the menu, remove
programs you do not need from the list, then you would not have a scroll
bar.
 
Well,

I for one,
think the searchbar in the start menu is WAY better than NOT having one in
X? hmmm X something-lol

Jeff
 
"old". That's relative.

It won't be "old news" for many come the end of the month.


-Michael
 
You must have liked the snowfall java appletss in web pages in the mid 90's, too.
It is not stupid, it is cool.
Another stupid Start Menu feature is the changing icon at the top of the
open Start Menu. This icon changes in your peripheral vision while you're
trying to focus on where the mouse pointer is at. Motion in the periphery
of a user's vision is specifically recommended against in the design
guidelines for Vista user interface elements on MSDN.

There are many UI elements in Vista that directly violate the UI guidelines
for Vista applications.

Dale
 
Or for even a long time after that. People will be discovering Vista flaws
for themselves for a few years yet.

Dale
 
You don't say who "he" is but really who's stuck in 1993 is you. Back then, eye candy was considered cool. Marquee controls scrolling text uselessly in web pages, falling-snow java applets that you could put any image into and watch snow fall in front of it, waving blue satin sheet backgrounds in web pages, web site home pages that you had to "click to enter site", and more. These were all useless visual effects but way too many people thought they were cool. Luckily, in UI design, we realized that we don't put in elements because they're cool. We put in UI elements because they add value and functionality.


Because that same square is changing constantly as a result of, but not keeping up with, mouse movements, it is, for all intents and purposes, an animation. Here's what the Vista UI design guidelines say about animations:

The human eye is sensitive to motion, especially peripheral motion. If you use animation to draw attention to something, make sure that attention is well deserved and worthy of interrupting the user's train of thought.


Here's the definition of "Cool" from Microsoft's own UI design pages for Vista:

What is "cool"?
WPF offers an exciting set of advanced capabilities. With this step forward comes the desire to create better—or "cooler"—software. All too often these attempts don't seem to hit the mark. To understand why, let's make a distinction between what makes a program cool and what doesn't.

A program really is "cool" when it has:

a.. Features appropriate for the program and its target users.
b.. Aesthetically pleasing look and feel, often in a subtle way.
c.. Improved usability and flow, without harming performance.
d.. A lasting good impression—it's just as enjoyable the 100th time as the first.
A program fails to be "cool" when it has:

a.. Use or abuse of a technology just because it can.
b.. Features that detract from usability, flow, or performance.
c.. Is in the user's face, constantly drawing unneeded attention to itself.
d.. A fleeting good impression. It might have been fun the first time, but the enjoyment wears off quickly.
He is stuck in 1993.

Michail

The year is 2007..
 
Back
Top