Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Vista User Interface Guidelines Published
SEMW writes "Microsoft has published the preliminary Official User Interface Guidelines for Windows Vista. Highlights include Top 12 Rules for the Windows Vista User Experience — and the use of screenshots from Windows XP as examples of what not to do. The full guidelines are as yet incomplete, but what is there makes for interesting reading."
My thoughts:
Use the Aero Theme and System Font (Segoe UI)
Good, but obvious.
Use common controls and common dialogs
ibid
Use the standard window frame, use glass (transparency) judiciously
Good good. If MS keeps making such a big deal about transparent UI tho, silly developers are gonna use it everywhere.
Use icons and graphics consistent with the Windows Vista style and quality
Good. If you follow this suggestion closely enough, maybe we can convince the users at home that your application comes from Microsoft, too.
Use task dialogs for new or frequently used dialog boxes and error messages
Good.
Use Aero Wizards
If you're replacing a 97 Wizard, you should use an Aero wizard. If you're writing a new app, please do not use a wizard. They're obnoxious, and send the message: "We didn't know how to organize your options in any sort of logical way, so here's a powerpoint that lets you fill in the blanks, masquearding as a UI."
Use Explorer-hosted, navigation-based user interfaces, provide a Back button
In short: Consider making programs that aren't web browsers behave like web browsers, since people use those alot. This is interesting, but at some point you have to explain the difference between the "Back" button and the "Undo" button, and you might just end up making your program into a wizard
Use the standard Windows Search (have a little iTunes style search box in your window's corner when appropriate)
A total dig on my part, and I apologize, but that's basically what they're saying. Apple makes the same recommendation, and give a very slick API for making it work. So good suggestion.
Use the Windows Vista tone in all UI text (use a professional writing style in you informative text)
From Microsofts mouth to ghod's ears.
Clean up the user interface
On their page they list all kinds of things you can do to make your program more ergonomic, but they put it at the end of the list, and phrase it in such a way as to suggest that it should be something you do at the end of development, as opposed to at the beginning, when you're designing your windows on a whiteboard. "Organize your command (sic) into a simple, predictable, and easy to find presentation" is something you do before you start writing code- it is not something you do while "cleaning up".
Use notifications judiciously
Or not at all. The list makes no suggestion about keeping your damn icons out of the systray.
Reserve development time for "fit and finish"!
Fit and Finish has quickly become my least favorite phrase. Sorry, just snarky, I agree with this point. But I would say "Hire a designer" as opposed to "reserve development time", mainly because it will allow collaboration with someone who always has their eyes on the UI and can give the developers continual feedback on how their code is totally rocking for the user ... experience, or totally deviating from reality.
Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
How I hate software that install all of that in their Start Menu entries. Or programs that insist they go into "C:\Program Files\My Stupid Software Company Inc\My Stupid Program".
Talking about reform, I find the most illogical thing of user interfaces is the menubar.. how do you exit? Go to "File". Where are the options? Under "Tools".. why can't somebody offer a totally new way of making the menu. Start with "Program", where you have "Options" and "About" (maybe "Help" too), then "Document" or "File", and then "Edit", etc.. We're so used to File -> Exit that we stop thinking how illogical such a construct is... exit the file?
What time is it/will be over there? Check with my iPhone app!
That's funny and all, but overall there's quite a bit of these guidelines to disagree with...
While not everyone is going to agree with all of my critique, I suspect we're going to be fairly united overall. I'd like to question why the Start Button is now the "circular shape with the four-color windowpane kind of shape in it that was in the bottom left when you got your computer but might have been moved to any of the other three corners". I'd like to know why in MMC windows and Explorer windows the plus-sign/minus-sign symbols to expand/collapse nodes is now the "hollow arrow pointing to the right" and the "solid arrow pointing fourty-five degrees downwards from the right". I'd like to know why in a world where Citrix and Terminal Services are increasingly predominantly used, we get things like swirling colour effects moving through progress bars to tell you the processor hasn't halted, just to slow down the interface. These are my initial impressions of Vista, from the perspective of an IT professional who has hundreds of users he needs to train, support, and troubleshoot.
Don't provide unnecessary details. A well-labeled progress bar provides sufficient information, so provide additional progress information only if users can do something with it.
And there, in a nutshell is MS' philosophy. Assume things are going to go right. I call bullshit. If you provide scads of additional information, such as what file is being copied, or how many [giga/mega/kilo]bytes remain, or what registry key is being written, or what dll is being registered, normal users will ignore it. Those who know things will be able to help when things go wrong.
Present choices and settings in terms of user goals, not technology.
I understand the goal of making users feel squishy and loved, but this is a support headache in the making. Now instead of helpdesk/IT people being able to train that users should look for "duplexing" and turn it on, they have to look for whatever variant of "print on both sides of the paper" or "flip paper and print on other side" each manufacturer chooses to use for their drivers/programs. Technology-based description of options tend to be predictable because a precise, definitive word or phrase is applied to the option.
While the minimum Windows Vista screen resolution remains at 800 x 600 pixels, resizable window layouts should be optimized for 1024 x 768 pixels.
And there you have it. Shouldn't this read "window layouts should always be scalable down to a minimum of 800x600 and should be resizable by users"? Sure, an OK/Cancel box could arguably not be resizable... but then too it's harmless if it is.
Never use confirmations as a form of user education.
Are you sure you really want to reformat your hard drive? You should pick 'no' unless you are absolutely certain that you want to erase all of your data on [drive letter]. Picking 'yes' will delete all information without hope of recovery. Proceed with extreme caution.
Make sure the properties are necessary. Don't clutter your pages with unnecessary properties just to avoid making hard design decisions.
Because hard design decisions don't generally correspond to the simple fact that some people prefer Coke and some Pepsi. Right. Give the user options. Any time you're not sure which design or option is better, let them make the choice. Except the Taskbar which should always be along the bottom, period. Whoever let users move the singlemost fundamental Windows95+ UI element should be shot.
Don't accompany error messages with sound effects. Doing so is jarring and unnecessary.
Thanks. I'll keep the person who made this choice in mind next time I've got a massive file copy going and I elect to read a book or something and it stops 10% in because the destination runs out of room, or I lack perms to a source file or something and it's just sitting there waiting for me to click 'ignore' or something. If I want it to b
"Oh no... he found the