|Where Microsoft has 'more taste' than Apple|
|By Thom Holwerda on 2012-07-22 17:05:06|
|Mike Elgan at Cult of Mac: "It must surely be a sign of the impending apocalypse that Microsoft's operating systems have 'more taste' than Apple's. I'm referring, of course, to Apple's inexplicable use of skeuomorphic design in iOS and OS X apps, and contrasting that with Microsoft's stark avoidance of such cheesy gimmickry in the Windows 8 and Windows Phone user interfaces. A skeuomorphic design in software is one that 'decorates' the interface with fake reality - say, analog knobs or torn paper. The problem is worse than it sounds." Won't come as a surprise to anyone that I wholeheartedly agree with this one. iOS and Mac OS X are ruined by an incredibly high Microsoft BOB factor. I have no idea how - or if - Apple will address this, or if the current downward spiral is going to continue.|
|By Raziel on 2012-07-22 17:38:36|
|I'm a Linux user and I disregard Microsoft and Apple in equal amounts, but I think you really don't know what you're talking about. What has always been beautiful and pleasant is suddenly considered bloat, just because Microsoft is trying to push a new Windows 3.11-era style in UIs?|
|- Score: 8|
|It is the circle of tech...|
|By HangLoose on 2012-07-22 17:48:51|
...just like in lion king. |
Remember when Microsoft tried that with Win 98? With the pin ball machine game, there was also a dialer and I remember an envelope (cant pin point where). And then came OSX with the "polished metal" looks and boy it was pretty.
Now tables have turned, MS is the UI inovator and Apple is stuck with the old and tired polished metal looks+weird-leather-casing- for-contact-book.
|- Score: 4|
|Not really an issue|
|By Poseidon on 2012-07-22 18:02:43|
It boils down to usability. Apple usually keeps the eye candy usable (With the exception of that change in folders from OS X Tiger). Microsoft seems to change stuff every other OS release for the sake of doing it. |
People just give meaning where there is none.
I personally loathe the peanut gallery of the Win 8 Start screen.
|- Score: 5|
|RE: Not really an issue|
|By cdude on 2012-07-22 18:12:43|
|Agrred. Usability is the key and not the eyecandy. The eyecandy is only a helper to reach that goal. Windows was and still s bloated. Just look at the amount of buttons, colors and space used in the new Office. Unsexy.|
|- Score: 4|
|RE: Not really an issue|
|By cheemosabe on 2012-07-22 18:21:49|
Indeed, Microsoft has really made a dubious turn. From "stick every function conceivable in there" 180 towards "pretty stuff, show only stuff you need most of the time". Finally a move in a direction I appreciate but leaving behind too much usability. While I appreciate it (just the direction) I'm glad most people won't :) |
Apple still seems to me unsurpassed in providing the easiest to use interfaces, uncluttered. You can find everything where you'd expect.
Still a Linux user...
|- Score: 1|
|By tomz on 2012-07-22 18:30:01|
The one difference in what apple used to do is the animations bore information, like a window shrinking to a specific location on the dock. Windows is mainly eye-candy. I don't want transparent menu bars, I want them small and unobtrusive. I want easy to click buttons and don't care about rounding and gradients. But now Apple is getting into the nonsense. The animations are meaningless. Instead of being able to see extra titles, we get icons on an eyecandy bookshelf or magazine rack. The spine of the book's image takes up valuable screen space. Aargh. |
Gutenberg didn't come up with something that looked like script handwriting when he came up with printing.
|- Score: 2|
|Both Apple and Microsoft can do better|
|By laffer1 on 2012-07-22 18:33:59|
I find that modern OS X is a nightmare with the leather bound address book and ugly iCal. Windows 8 looks like a children's toy with the colorful boxes. The era or professional, clean user interfaces is over. it really started going down with Windows XP on Microsoft's side and Lion with Apple, although let's not forget the brushed metal look they experimented with. |
I've experimented with this real world object idea on an app. Eventually, I came to my senses because it truly was ugly. I had a "journal" view for a blogging app.
It's like every developer at Apple and Microsoft have forgotten history. Are all the old timers gone who remember Microsoft Bob and the Quicktime 4? It wasn't just them either. Some people may remember Packard Bell Navigator. (computers shipped in the mid 90s had it)
I don't think it's limited to desktops either. Some of the new mobile apps I've seen are just as hideous and it's even showing up on the web in some places. The era of ugly is upon us.
|- Score: 3|
|By Morgan on 2012-07-22 18:36:13|
It hasn't always been beautiful and pleasant to everyone. This isn't just one of Thom's fetishes, I happen to have always found skeuomorphism silly and unnecessary. The only exception I've ever made is with music multitracking software; the analogue of an on-screen interface to a real mixing board is a functional example of skeuomorphism done right. As a musician, I find it much easier to glance at a virtual control that looks just like what I use in the real world, rather than an OS-specific slider widget. |
That said, I think Apple goes too far with, for example, GarageBand with its wasted pixels on either side to represent functionless wooden cabinet panels. That's the key difference: If the skeuomorphism is functional, then (as long as it looks pleasing to the eye) it can be a good thing. But doing it for kicks or because you think it looks "organic" without function to back it up is just wrong.
As for Metro, it's about as far from Windows 3.11 as you can get. Have you actually used a Metro interface? I live with it every day on my phone, and it's highly intuitive, simple, elegant and stays out of my way. It's not perfect; no interface ever will be, and there are a few things I'd love to change about it. But it works for me so I stick with it.
|- Score: 8|
|By Raziel on 2012-07-22 18:41:56|
|Used the W7 phone Launcher a couple of days on my Android phone. Looks nice at first glance, but lacks a lot of functionality I'm used to, I switched back to my default Android launcher.|
|- Score: 0|
|By Morgan on 2012-07-22 18:51:30|
Right, you used a poorly implemented visual clone of Metro, written as a launcher for a completely different OS, and you're condemning it based on that? That's no different than calling OS X unusable based on an Aqua skin for Gnome or Xfce. |
All of that "missing functionality" is present in the real thing; I would suggest testing out a WP7 phone at a store. Who knows, you may still find it lacking, but at least then it would be an honest, informed opinion.
|- Score: 4|