Slashdot Mirror


Windows Software Ugly, Boring & Uninspired

An anonymous reader writes "CPU magazine has written a very straight-to-the-point editorial on the lack of quality and innovation in software for the mainstream OS. They compare it to the Mac, which is found in a much different light. Where has all the innovation gone?" From the article: "There's too much coal and not enough diamonds within the sphere of downloads. The greatest pieces of software are plagued by unintelligent design, and very few rise to the level of ubiquity. Windows users don't have a strong sense of belonging; there's no user community rallying around the platform. We use the computer, certainly, or is the computer using us?"

26 of 924 comments (clear)

  1. Garbage by nokilli · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So if it's so ugly, boring & uninspired, there should be a ton of examples as to how, say, Mac OS X is so much more beautiful, exciting and uplifting? Yet, he's only able to give us one:
    With Apple's release of Tiger, widgets--desktop applets that each serve one purpose--have jumped to the forefront of everybody's imagination. Why? Because they look slicker than snot!
    Excuse me, but Widgets are easily the most retarded thing out of Apple since the Dock.

    There isn't one of them that gives you functionality that your browser doesn't already afford. Sure, they're pretty, but what's going to happen is that as people amass more and more of these widgets, the dashboard becomes cluttered and slow (it already is painfully slow on my MDD 1.25GHz G4, and that's just with the stock widgets, with the default set active only). Then there's going to be the question as to how to organize them all... the faux dock at the bottom is already insufficient. I know, let's stick a menu in there! Great idea!

    Why not call it the Widgets Menu? And when you choose a widget from the menu, up comes the widget! Just like if you had chosen a bookmark from the Bookmarks menu from your favorite browser: up comes the web page containing the info you sought!

    Or, we could create a page of little Widgets links, and then the user could click on the link and up pops the widget! Just as if it were a web page full of links, each leading to a separate page with different and useful functionality!

    So my question is, why not just use the browser? IT ALREADY DOES THESE THINGS!

    Not as pretty? Find a web page that has a decent designer/artist behind it. Between CSS and the GiMP, there's no excuse for ugly web pages anymore.

    If you want to throw stones, throw them at a target that deserves to get hit: the Desktop Metaphor. Menus and windows with scrollbars and dialog boxes and lions and tigers and bears. The same constraints that Windows suffers under are also felt by Mac OS X, Gnome and KDE users too.

    The branding has nothing to do with it.

    BTW, Chris Pirillo, the guy who wrote this, he's the one who couldn't make the cut as a TechTV ScreenSaver, isn't that right?
    1. Re:Garbage by sgant · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow, there's one web page out there that allows a browser to do all the things that a widget does...at a glance? I mean, you go to the widgets and BAM you see everything on one desktop all in one place and at a glance you see or can use specific things.

      Didn't know an ordinary browser does this too! Which one? Where do I find that feature at? Again, which browser/web page has all this stuff all at the same time? You seem to know! Tell us oh wise one!

      --

      "Leo Fender was in a 'state of grace' when he designed the Stratocaster." -- Paul Reed Smith
    2. Re:Garbage by itistoday · · Score: 4, Insightful
      There isn't one of them that gives you functionality that your browser doesn't already afford. Sure, they're pretty, but what's going to happen is that as people amass more and more of these widgets, the dashboard becomes cluttered and slow (it already is painfully slow on my MDD 1.25GHz G4, and that's just with the stock widgets, with the default set active only). Then there's going to be the question as to how to organize them all... the faux dock at the bottom is already insufficient. I know, let's stick a menu in there! Great idea!
      Widgets take up very little memory and all of the default ones take up 0% of the CPU most of the time (check with top if you don't believe me). You've got something else going on there if you say it's sluggish.

      Your "Widget Menu" is coming though, and although it's already available in the form of many third-party tools, Apple will be releasing one built into the Dashboard in their upcoming update: 10.4.2

      As for the rest of your post, you clearly seem to have a very poor understanding of OS X. I suggest reading up on it to find out "a ton of examples as to how, say, Mac OS X is so much more beautiful, exciting and uplifting?".
    3. Re:Garbage by itistoday · · Score: 3, Insightful
      So my question is, why not just use the browser? IT ALREADY DOES THESE THINGS!
      Sorry, a web browser cannot do all the things as quickly and conveniently as Dashboard. Say I'd like to leave a note for myself with a list of groceries, while I'm not sure how you'd do with with a web browser, you can easily use the built-in "sticky note" widget to jot down several items.

      What if you want to know the 5 day forcast for this week? You could launch up firefox and go to an easily memorizable website like weather.com, navigate through it, and find your forcast among the puddle of advertisements, or you could just press F12 and instantly see it in a very clear, simple interface.

      Need to do some quick multiplication? Instead of searching google for a bloody online calculator, press F12 and out of nowhere pops up a calculator instantly.

      In class and listening to a boring lecture? Press F12 and quickly play a few games like Pacman, chess, and Snake, right in the dashboard - no internet connection required!

      Umm... so how would you do all that with a web browser, especially if you have... no internet connection? ;-)
    4. Re:Garbage by rufo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree with the grandparent - Dashboard is neat, but it's way too slow to be used much of the time. I use Quicksilver and in combination with a few bookmarks it does just about everything I need it to.

      Weather w/Quicksilver: Cmd-Space, W-E-A-T, enter, Safari pops up and loads my weatherunderground.com bookmark.
      Dashboard: F12.... wait... wait... wait... wait... oh, here it is. I need more information... double-click... wait... Safari comes up.
      I actually often use Meterologist, which is even faster then both Dashboard and my bookmark.

      Calculations: Cmd-Space, 4+4, tab, C-A-L-C, enter, result pops up. Or, if I want the kick-ass full Apple calculator, Cmd-Space, C-A-L-C, enter, up it pops.
      Dashboard: F12... wait... wait... click... wait... type calculation.
      As an added bonus, I can do as fancy calculations as I want with QS, complete with parenthesis and layered calculations.

      Games: Cmd-Space, POP (or BEJ or SCU or...), enter.
      Dashboard: F12... wait... wait... click... wait... (as an unfortunate bonus, you only get to play in a little window. :-()

      I'm not saying Quicksilver is the end-all be all, but even when I don't use it cmd-tabbing to Safari and clicking my Weather bookmark takes less time then Dashboard. My computer isn't horrible either - things should not be this slow on a Dual 1Ghz G4 with 1GB of RAM and a fast Seagate 7200.8 300GB drive.

      In Dashboard's defense, some of the widgets are genuinely fantastic, and once I activate it for the session (read: once every few hours) it usually isn't too bad to use... but the few times it is sluggish, it makes me wonder why I use the thing.

      --
      My English teacher once told me that two positives don't make a negative. Two words for her: Yeah, right.
  2. It's a tool, not a piece of art by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does it work? Does it make me more productive? That's what I want to know. Everything else is secondary, especially how "inspired" and "exciting" it is.

    1. Re:It's a tool, not a piece of art by Decaff · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does it work? Does it make me more productive? That's what I want to know. Everything else is secondary, especially how "inspired" and "exciting" it is.

      Inspired and exciting design makes people more productive.

    2. Re:It's a tool, not a piece of art by Decaff · · Score: 4, Insightful

      'Inspired' and 'Exciting' are bullshit terms that are meaningless in this context. Intuitiveness and consistency makes people more productive.

      Not at all. 'intuitive' and 'consistent' makes things easy to use, 'inspired' and 'exciting' makes people want to use them. All these factors contribute to productivity.

  3. Windows... by sapgau · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Would not change until strong economic incentives force microsoft to innovate.

    Monopolies are strange that way.

    1. Re:Windows... by Seumas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't use OSX for the pretty interface. I use OSX for the very usable interface built on a solid BSD foundation, with a nice big utility door that I can step into when I want or need to get my hands directly onto that BSD foundation.

      I don't need two machines or a dual-boot Windows/Linux box. I have my pretty, useful, friendly desktop (fully media-capable too, in a way that linux simply never has been) and if I want my unix-y goodness, I just pop up a terminal. Life is beautiful!

  4. Just an idea, but by wcitech · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is just an idea, but has anybody considered that maybe our computers are designed around our personalities?

    Think about it, who do you think of when you think of a mac user? Granted, there are many out there, but when I think of a hardcore mac user I think of somebody who is into designing music, movies, graphics editing, etc. They are designed to cater to a group of people who are more creative and right brained.

    How about your average PC user? Picture an office cubicle. You'r accountant, lawyer, and doctor all use a PC.

    Let us never forget that pretty software does not automatically mean functional software, and please God let us never make well structured code and functionality less of a priority than UI "prettyness".

    1. Re:Just an idea, but by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you know what the engineers around me use? IBMs and HPs. IBMs because they are durable and have nice keyboards, and HPs because many of them work for HP (HP is a large employer in my city - nearly 6500 employees).

      The only reason Sun employees are running around with PowerBooks is the fact that Sun doesn't have a decent notebook (at least not one that's reasonably priced with good battery life) and the fact that everyone else is seen as a competitor to Sun. HP, IBM, and Dell all have server lines that compete with Sun directly. Apple is seen as a non-threat.

      It's the same reason that HP is selling the iPod. HP doesn't see Apple as a threat, so it's "OK" to partner with them.

      That's why you have PowerBooks. Corporate politics.

  5. Just wait, it'll come to Linux too. by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    With rapid development environments like Visual Basic around for the Windows OS, it's not surprising that there is a lot more crap out there for Windows, verses other OS that don't have these easy to pick up IDEs. It simply takes a more developed skill set to write apps for MAC and *nix. I think that when (not if) a high quality and easy to learn development platform for Linux comes along, we'll start to see mountains of shit for it, too. Indeed, think about all the crappy web apps and dynamic web sites, written in your scripting language de Jour, this is what we have to look forward to.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  6. Picassa by David+Horn · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google's Picassa is the first piece of really inspired interface design I've seen in a long time. If only Windows / Mac / Linux was this easy to use and looked as good.

    --
    PocketGamer.org - For the gamer on the go!
  7. Shell Integration by DanielMarkham · · Score: 4, Insightful

    One of the things that few companies do is integrated into the Windows Shell. Windows provides ample opportunities for an application to just dissapear and become part of the operating system. For instance, in a chat program, your chat buddies could appear as icons in a folder right alongside your other files --- dragging and dropping a file onto your friend's icon would start transferring the file. There are a lot of other examples, but part of the problem I think is pride (and not just in windows development) Everybody wants to do something a little differently. If you have a standardized skinnable shell and plug in your apps around that it would do a lot for the appeal of the product.
    And don't even get started on annoying popups and those freaking MS Office icons like the paperclip guy.
    To me, a big part of design is noticability: if I take my time to notice it, it's getting in the way of the work I want to do.

  8. Re:This is stupid by jcr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First off, I didn't read the article, but I will comment

    Yep, that's stupid, all right.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  9. Re:Mac isn't boring and uninteresting?! by homesteader · · Score: 3, Insightful

    And by the way, if you don't like safari, don't use it. In fact if you don't like it DELETE IT! It's just an app, like anything else. Yes the webkit framework will remain for any apps coded to it, but you don't need Safari. Camino and Firefox have always seemed relatively quick to me.

    As for OS X being rigid, I think an OS should be fairly rigid, in the same way that the laws of physics are rigid. It's a constraint, but one that we all understand instinctively. And if you don't like it, there are plenty of extensions to it. Check out www.unsanity.com

    Show me a WinXX hack as cool as QuickSilver. Hell, windows doesn't even have hot corners.

    As for windows theming, most of it is crap. Nice for eyecandy for a while, but totally lacking in consistency.

    Want to talk about rigidity? How about the fact that in Windows you only have one command line interpreter? And cmd.exe can't even copy/paste like a normal app.

    The one thing that bugs me in OS X is the lack of a quick route to executing a shell command, a la Start:Run in windows, but QuickSilver pretty much fixes this.

  10. -Shudder- by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Windows users don't have a strong sense of belonging; there's no user community rallying around the platform.

    That's a feature, not a bug. I HATE the "belonging" aspect of the Mac community. I just want to own the freaking hammer, I don't want to join a hammer cult.

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
  11. Windows rants: boring, ugly, uninspired by sootman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, yet another Generation Y-er (OMG! 3 'no carrier' jokes in the first paragraph! U R TEH FUNNYMAN!!!!!11one) posts yet another mindless rant about how Windows sucks. We hear how great his PSP is, how well Apple is doing with the iPod (thank you, Captain Obvious!) and how OS X apps are infinitely superior to Windows apps.

    The twin barbs of his attack: Dashboard (which has already been discussed to death; let's just say that as many people hate it as love it) and an application called "Comic Life", which this grizzled veteran of computing (look at the picture) thinks "is likely to drive even the most die-hard Windows user to switch to OS X." Yeah: I'm gonna dump my whole platform to make my digital pictures cuter. Uh-huh. I'm surprised he didn't sneak a 'BSOD' joke into his rant or spell Windows with 'BL' or a dollar sign.

    One mark in his favor: clearly, he is an expert in boring and uninspired. A lame blog post about Windows software sucking? Wow. Next.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  12. Re:What does he mean? by Jugalator · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If every developer innovated new metaphors for common tasks, the tools would quickly become terribly confusing IMHO. I think it's good with standarized terms for common tasks. Boring isn't exactly the word I'd choose here. Besides, he seem to complain about Windows software in particular, and many of these terms aren't specific to Windows.

    --
    Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
  13. who is this nerd? by delong · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Windows users don't have a strong sense of belonging; there's no user community rallying around the platform. We use the computer, certainly, or is the computer using us?"

    That is one of the dumbest things I have read all week. Normal folks use computers as a means to an end. Just because the author gets a hardon over extraneous features and eye candy that add nothing to productivity, and is apparently thirteen and in need of being part of a group, doesn't mean the rest of us give a flying shit.

  14. How do I mod down front page articles? by geekee · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, people shouldn't even waste their time reading the front page blurb on this one.

    --
    Vote for Pedro
  15. Re:Mac isn't boring and uninteresting?! by St.+Arbirix · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In fact, I would say that the Apple experience is very Orwellian. "Here is the interface you will use. It is the same as every other interface. Your ability to configure it and later it is very limited, but you will learn to love it and live with it."

    That's like complaining that the Federation ships in Star Trek are oppressively minimalistic in interior design. These are things which people actually prefer. There's nothing Orwellian about it. It's why New York City is so much easier to navigate than Atlanta, why ancient Rome looks so sane, why the Spaniards were blown away when they saw Tenochtitlan. These things were all planned. The Windows and Linux interfaces show the effects of suburban sprawl, OSX doesn't allow it.

    The Apple interface is just as Orwellian as the Google interface. The reason you don't get this with Windows is that Windows has always used a half-assed copy of whatever Apple's doing with its interface. Unix grew up with interfaces that you had to just deal with, and Linux is in constant flux between feature creep and slimming down.

    --
    Direct away from face when opening.
  16. Most Women: Ugly, Boring & Uninspired by Carcass666 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The media would have you believe 80% of the women are ugly, boring and uninspired based upon what they hold up as a reference model (heroin-addict thin, vapeous, self-absorbed, etc.) This does not make most women less productive than their "beautiful" counterparts in Hollywood movies or New York runways. In fact, most succesful families and productive careers are spearheaded by women who look nothing like Paris Hilton.

    Likewise, there are a bunch of ugly Windows applications doing a lot of work. Like it or not, Microsoft made it possible for mediocre programmers to make boring apps that get a lot of work done. These programs may not be innovative with pretty UI gimmicks that suck up CPU cycles, they tend to use more resources than they ought to, and they are fraught with spaghetti and bugs, but they get the work done.

    The lack of innovation may help minimize training when teaching new apps. Teaching new paradigms is expensive and time consuming.

    Like it or not, ugly is what most work is getting done on.

  17. No shit Sherlock by springMute · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Windows users don't have a strong sense of belonging; there's no user community rallying around the platform

    In other news, there's no 'user community' rallying about around the world. I don't see people running around and screaming "HELL YEAH EARTH FOR TEH WIN!" at least.

    When something's so big and so vast and there's no majority to keep oppressing you, there's no "user community rallying". People just accept it how it is. If Mac was the dominant platform, if the niche feeling was lost, there would be no 'macintosh user community' feel anymore.

  18. Huh?!? by ZosX · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Lets look at some statistics.

    Marketshare for Desktop OS

    Windows ~90%
    MacOS ~5%
    Linux ~3%

    That means that for every great app, there is likely to be nearly 100x more terrible apps for Windows than for the other operating systems. Its like the Playstation. Because Sony has the greater market, they also have the larger number of terrible games. An operating system does not make an application good or bad, regardless of whether pretty widgets are in the toolbar. Personally there are quite a few Windows applications that I could not live without that do not have any sort of linux equivalent good enough to allow me to switch.

    Here are a few:

    Mp3tag (Best tagger out there)
    Photoshop
    Illustrator
    Reason
    Ableton Live
    Reaktor
    Sound Forge
    Picasa2
    CDex
    Alcohol 120%
    GAMES GAMES GAMES GAMES

    I could go on, but the fact of the matter is that at the very least Linux needs to start getting some serious sound applications for me to make the switch. I used to dual boot, but in the end it was such a pain anytime I wanted to play a game or work on some music that I gave up and stuck with the one environment that has all of my needs satisfied. MacOS is kind of interesting and has all the audio software I would ever need, but at what cost? More expensive hardware and about 0 games I'd be interested in. For what I didn't have to pay for my copy of windows, I'd be awfully hard pressed to start paying apple for an OS update every 6 months.

    My point is that its not the platform that it is the problem its just that a lot of lazy and piss poor developers tend to flock to the platform that is the most popular. To be perfectly honest, if you want a great example of a platform that has a lot of god awful software, just take a look at linux and the bazillion apps that never got past their second alpha prerelease.

    Hell, just look at how many system tools are included in distributions that are not even version 1 yet. Granted I've had very few problems with a lot of the console tools I've used, but after a while you start to realize that a little bit of polish goes an awful long ways. For instance, apt-get:

    aptluna:~# apt-get -version
    apt 0.5.28.6 for linux i386 compiled on Mar 22 2005 07:17:03

    Granted apt is about as solid as a console tool can get, but version .5? Why not just make it version 1 and clean up any nagging bugs? Unless, of course, they plan on adding more features on their roadmap.

    I love how when I look for linux apps in sourceforge, a great deal of what I find that would be interesting to use is at version .01 and such. Not even a tenth of a final version. Granted I know that open source projects move slowly, but why even bother advertising your project when it isn't even 1/10th of the way done?

    I know people here resent it being called open sores software, but in too many cases, calling it open sores would almost be a compliment.