I disagree with you. Just because we have learned how to deal with the
way that Windows GUI functions does not mean that that is the best way
that it should of been done. If fact I would say that most of the time
they do it wrong but they are consistently wrong. So, I guess, in a
warped way it works.
Lets take iTunes. The users that you where demonstrating the
application to were so used to hunting through the menus they did not
figure out the very evident burn button. My question is this: How is
"hunting through the menus" better then a simple button in the upper
right hand corner of the main window better? How long did the user
take to figure out it's use and once that was learned I would say they
had an easier time from then on.
Ok, lets take your comment "[other operating systems] maintain a
visual standard of always having certain menus". I beg to differ. I
have always found the "File" menu item, the "Edit" menu item in many
menu on a variety of different OSs. Yet other then those two items the
menus have been different for almost every single application that i
have used (yes on Mac, Linux and Windows).
Your focus on a single OS I think is incomplete in it's scope. I would
go down the road of getting, us the programers, to design a better UI
that would function well across all OSs. There are failing in all OSs,
but with that said I prefer Mac over all the others.
Ian
--
----------------------
Ian Sheridan
http://www.savagevines.com
----------------------
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Kelp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 10:45:37 -0500
Subject: Re: WWOT: OS X for Intel?
To: CF-Talk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I think a lot of people go too far in giving Apple's UI such high
scores. Personally, I think that no OS deserves a near perfect score
for it. A UI is far more than pretty buttons and smooth gradients that
look cool. Apple has a huge problem with UI in the sense that when
installing varying applications from apple or other vendors on the
macintosh platform there is absolutely no visual standard for creating
the GUI.
For whatever reason, (not to say that this is on purpose) apps written
for Windows and even many linux applications seem to maintain a visual
standard of always having certain menus that users can reference when
searching for functions and they give the user a "order of operations"
for finding a feature or at least finding help. While I'm sure
Microsoft will find a way to mess up one good thing about the UI for
PC software, this is a good example of a place where I think Apple
fails miserably. This is particularly true for iTunes as many users
that I have shown iTunes to both on mac and PC have a lot of trouble
finding out that the radioactive-like symbol is a button for "burn cd"
and objects that look like status information in the current track
display are also buttons.
On the other hand, apple does offer a more inviting look in their UI
and encourages users to become more interested than in Windows. I
think there are a lot of valuable points for Apple there. I would
basically reverse the tables on this topic.
Point being, I think we often forget what we are talking about when we
say "UI" in place of "cool look". As developers, being able to
consider a user's ability to find things and use them efficiently is
just as valuable or more than getting them to say "it looks neat" and
we should never forget that important goal of our jobs.
Sorry for the long post and thanks to anybody willing to read the
whole thing hehe.
--
Mike Kelp
--Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one.
~Malcolm S. Forbes
--If knowledge is power, know this is tyranny.
~Thrice
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
