On Design: The Philosophies of Apple and Microsoft
1. Introduction
I decided to write this article for a few reasons: First was a conversation on the design of mobile operating systems on one of the tech podcasts I listen to (it may have been The Verge, but I listen to so many, I can't recall) that stated that as the oldest design of the modern mobile OSes, it was time for a complete rethinking of the design language of iOS. The second was Joanna's segment on the last "On The Verge", where she showed the interface tweaks of Rainmeter and Fences. Tiring of Windows Aero, I spent the past 2 days tweaking and customizing Windows, despite absolutely loving Aero when it came out.
Custom desktop using Rainmeter with the Omnimo 4 skin, via joedombrowski.com
This got me thinking about the design philosophies of Microsoft and Apple. The conventional thought is that Apple is the design forward company, valuing design at the expense of usability and function, and that Microsoft is the opposite, eschewing high design for higher functionality. Though there is evidence to back up this thought, I see much more evidence to the contrary.
Note that throughout this editorial, I refer to design, interface design, et al. meaning the visual design language. This is not about how the interfaces work, functionality, or usability. It is a purely visual comparison. It also never refers to hardware design, as this is exclusively a comparison of software.
2. Genesis
The basis of conventional thought
Fonts
In 1984, with the introduction of the Mac, Apple made it abundantly clear where they intended the desktop paradigm to go. They eschewed the typewriter style monospace fonts for the first digital typeface to feature (primitive) kerning, as designed by Susan Kare (Silberman, 2011). Though Microsoft also released proportionally spaced fonts with Windows in 1985, it was clearly Apple who pioneered this philosophy. In the same trend, the Macintosh has continually updated its font rendering with the goal of displaying fonts as they appear in print.
The trend continues into the modern day of the competing text rendering philosophies of Microsoft and Apple. To apple, the font is king. For example, on a capital 'A', the middle bar might appear between two pixels. On a Mac, the font would not move the bar, but use two rows of pixels at a lower intensity to accurately render the original font proportions. On the other hand, a Windows system would simply move the line up or down so that it aligned to the actual pixel grid. The result is sharper text, that is easier to read, but does not correspond to the appearance of printed text (Spolsky, 2007). Additionally, Windows does not use a linear scaling of fonts; again, this leads to better readability, but at the expense of the integrity of both font and layout (Guard, 2007).
I will not comment on which philosophy is right, because both have their benefits, but because I tend to do a lot of minimalist design involving typography, I prefer the Mac style (despite being primarily a Windows user). For those like me, the GDIPP project attempts to bring better font rendering to Windows, though I had to do some pretty severe tweaking to the settings to make it look good in all circumstances (gdipp: Customizable Windows text renderers, 2010).
Gamma
This is an often overlooked aspect of the design debate, but in my opinion, an important continuation of the previous section. From their inception until 2009, the gamma of the two competing platforms differed. Mac OS used a gamma value of 1.8, while Windows used 2.2. Microsoft chose 2.2, because it was the gamma used in the television industry, further solidifying their 'digital design' philosophy. On the other hand, even though the native gamma of the original Macintosh monitor was 2.5 (the same as cinema), Apple decided that the platform would adopt a value of 1.8 in order to better match on screen text and graphics to their printed counterparts, as the standard gamma for commercial printers was 1.8 (Johnson, 2006).
I mentioned that this was until 2009. When Apple released Snow Leopard, they changed the default gamma setting in Mac OS from 1.8 to the 2.2 value of Windows. So why 2.2 and not 2.5? Well, the higher the gamma, the darker non color-managed images will look. In the dark environment of a cinema, 2.5 is perfect for accurately representing color, while in a home or office environment, it might appear too dim. Therefore, the compromise used for decades in televisions was brought over to the computer.
2. Exodus
Expelling the myth
The early interfaces of operating systems were less an exercise in high design, and more in usability. In 1994, our family purchased a Macintosh Performa 630CD. The bundled 800x600 12" monitor seemed positively enormous at the time, but is dwarfed by the giant monitors we use now. The 15 and 17" 1024x768 monitors we purchased alongside our next two computers (Compaq Presario 4860 and Compaq Presario 7360), though larger, didn't fare much better. This meant that through Windows 98 and Mac OS 8/9, information density was far more important than design, eliminating some tenets of classic design like negative/white space and separation of elements. Interfaces were typically thin grey tool-bars packed with menus, icons, and information output. Though there were obviously still design considerations in both, neither platform had reached the point where a serious design conversation could be breached.
On the other hand, in 2001, the proliferation of larger, higher resolution monitors was becoming much greater, and both Microsoft and Apple attempted to take advantage of the new real estate with the first "design forward" operating systems: Windows XP and Mac OS X.
Microsoft: Design for the time
Uncharacteristically, Microsoft chose a playful approach to its 2001 operating system. With a blue taskbar, green start button, animated paperclip, and bold red accents, Microsoft's "Luna" design language continues to confuse me. Why would a company who provides such a high percentage of the world's business oriented computers choose this approach? I was unable to find any definitive sources discussing the design language of Windows XP, presumably because design on and for computer interfaces was relatively new at this point, so everything I say here is conjecture.
Microsoft's "Luna" design language, via x2q.net
The only thing I can think of is that Apple had been running an ad campaign for years, heralding Mac OS as the simple and approachable alternative to the dense and difficult Windows. By choosing a playful theme, Microsoft may have hoped to increase the appeal of their operating system to the same crowd Apple was trying to woo away. One thing that I am sure of is that the design was specifically to appeal to the computer user of the time, a reaction to what came before. After 16 years of design for information density, Microsoft decided to do the polar opposite.
For me, what comes next is what is much more interesting to me. The playful primary colors of Windows XP's Luna language gave way to the Aero interface of 2006. With Vista, Microsoft moved to smooth transition effects, masses of transparency, and a much more "professional" look. This is another prime example of the "design for the times" philosophy that Microsoft has employed since the very beginning. As computers became more powerful, and the install base of performance video cards increased, Microsoft created a design language to show off the new power. At the time, Aero was intensely refreshing from a design point of view, and in my opinion, made Windows the most beautiful operating system on the market. The blend of the disappearing interface with these high end graphical flourishes immediately made everything else seem dated.
Microsoft's "Aero" design language, via photos.joedombrowski.com
At its release, my initial thought was that the Aero interface was thoroughly modern, and would stand the test of time. Though Aero looks far from bad by today's standards, it is certainly showing its age. After the novelty of the see through windows and 3D effects wore off, Aero is beginning to overstay its welcome.
Enter Metro. The first time Microsoft showed hints of a brand new design language was on the Zune music player and desktop software. A new typographic interface characterized by text running off the edge, clean lines, and bold colors, the Zune had a design never seen before in computing. Microsoft continued to refine the language, culminating in the release of Windows Phone 7. They took some of the characteristic elements and gave them meaning. For example, on the Zune, the cut off text was simply for design's sake, while on Windows Phone, it signifies that there's more to be seen on the next page. Next year, Windows will undergo a similar shift, bringing the metro design language to the desktop.
Microsoft's "Metro" design language, via windowsteamblog.com
My reaction to Metro is similar to how I felt at the onset of Aero: this is a bold, beautiful, and modern interface. It once again leapfrogs the competition in design, but for how long? Will I look again in 5-6 years and think that Metro is looking old? As much as I hate to admit it, I probably will. It's unabashedly modern, and I would go so far as to say that it defines the cutting edge of interface design in 2011, but as is the fate of most powerful designs, there will come a time when the trends change and it simply dates itself.
Although it never occurred to me until the transition from XP to Vista, this trend is not new. In 1985, Microsoft released Windows 1.0 with a color palette that could only look good on a black and white monitor. In 1990, the OS received a major design change, opting for a much more subtle color scheme. 1995 brought the taskbar, the start menu, and an all gray interface. It was clean and professional, but also a bit dull. In 2001 (A year late, Microsoft!) came the primary colors, bevels, and curves of Windows XP, followed by Aero in 2006, and finally Metro in 2011. Each iteration seemed extremely modern at its inception, but none of them aged particularly well.
Going back to my opening statement, this shows Microsoft not as a "function over form" company, but as one who continually designs for the current time, cyclically throwing away their design language and starting anew. Especially in recent years, Microsoft is definitely a design forward company, whose products speak of the current state of the art in computing and interface design.
Apple: Design for timelessness
Unlike Microsoft's propensity to put themselves out on the cutting edge of design, Apple has always opted for the classic look. One that, though it never leaps out as an expression of modern design, tends to age more gracefully.
If you look at Mac OS, the basic interface is the same from version 1 right up through Lion. A simple desktop, a small bar of menus at the top, and that's it. However, clearly, the colors and patterns have changed dramatically through the years. Like the Windows side, I will focus on more recent history, including only Mac OS X and iOS.
Though earlier versions of Mac OS X suffered from the less than beautiful Aqua color scheme, which has been slowly phased out for the current subtle gray interface enjoyed by Lion, OS X has never had a major design language shift. Each version makes some subtle changes: subduing colors and patterns, transparency on the menu bar, a 3D dock, but overall, OS X looks much the same today as it did in 2001.
Mac OS 10.0 (Left) and OS 10.7 Lion (Right), via photos.joedombrowski.com
This, in and of itself isn't all that interesting; that doesn't come into play until you start making comparisons. For me, in 2001, it was a toss-up between Luna and Aqua as to which looked better. I leaned towards Luna as long as the silver theme was applied, but Aqua otherwise.
By 2005, the design of OS X was a bit of a mess. Some applications used the familiar Aqua theme, some the brushed metal, and yet others used the flat gray more common on the later versions. However, by then, Windows XP was so overdue for an update, that even in this state, Mac OS stood out as a much nicer piece of design.
However, when Vista brought Aero, Windows took the clear lead in design. It was a much more focused, coherent, and contemporary design language, and to me, was far more appealing. Until it wasn't. Recently, I've been once again preferring the design on Mac OS X, especially now that the inconsistency is all but gone. (Ignoring the "playful" vestiges of Aqua, like the beach ball, bouncing dock icons, and minimize effect)
Metro will once again pull ahead, but I suspect that given enough time, Mac OS will once again start to look more appealing. This cycle makes perfect sense. Just like Apple looked to printed text to inform the design of Macintosh System 1, Apple has always looked towards more timeless design elements from outside of the electronic world, giving it a more classic, but never exciting, appearance.
This brings me back to iOS, and the notion that it needs a complete redesign. In the face of Windows Phone Mango and Android's Ice Cream Sandwich, it certainly doesn't look modern, but I suspect that Apple isn't going to make any dramatic changes any time soon. They'll ride out the wave of contemporary styles, and likely come out on the other side with a product that never seems too out of date.
Real world influences in Apple's Design, via photos.joedombrowski.com
However, there is one area that Apple should reconsider. Given their tendency to pull design from outside of technology, it's unsurprising that they turned to real world objects for some of their latest redesigns. A leather bound contacts book, a calendar complete with torn off page, and other new applications on Lion could end up hurting the longevity of their design unless they rethink it, and fast. Though Apple has seen great design longevity for thinking outside of the digital domain, at the end of the day, the interface needs to cue the user how to interact, and needs to be designed for the medium on which it will appear, and these ‘real world' applications simply do not work well in a desktop environment.
4. Revelations
Putting it all together
It should be clear by now that Apple does not have the monopoly on design. Both companies, especially in the modern computing era, have been very design focused, but have adopted extremely different philosophies. Which is better? To be honest, that's a matter of opinion. I'd personally almost always choose the new and exciting design when it first comes out, but as it ages, I start looking elsewhere.
It's a similar situation to fashion. Every decade is defined by some modern, forward design fashion. At the time, they are new, they look great, but glancing back through the decades, one can only be left to think "Why did we ever think that looked good?" On the other hand, Apple's design seems to never go out of style. It's the black slacks and white button down shirt, never at the cutting edge, but always appropriate.
Innovation and design at the interactive element level is a completely separate story, and I may write up an editorial on that as well, but as for visual design, you can choose your own poison. Even if that poison is Windows.
5. References
gdipp: Customizable Windows text renderers. (2010, September). Retrieved December 15, 2011, from Google Code: http://code.google.com/p/gdipp/
Guard, D. (2007, June). Font rendering philosophies of Windows & Mac OS X. Retrieved December 15, 2011, from damieng: http://damieng.com/blog/2007/06/13/font-rendering-philosophies-of-windows-and-mac-os-x
Johnson, B. (2006, September 3). Earthbound Light. Retrieved December 15, 2011, from The Gamma Question: 1.8 or 2.2?: http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/gamma-18-or-22.html
Silberman, S. (2011, November 22). The Sketchbook of Susan Kare, the Artist Who Gave Computing a Human Face. Retrieved December 15, 2011, from PLoS BLOGS: http://blogs.plos.org/neurotribes/2011/11/22/the-sketchbook-of-susan-kare-the-artist-who-gave-computing-a-human-face/
Spolsky, J. (2007, June 12). Font smoothing, anti-aliasing, and sub-pixel rendering. Retrieved December 15, 2011, from Joel on Software: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/06/12.html
There are 94 Comments. Add yours.
This is a great article. Thanks for putting the time into it. Personally as a designer, I tend to think that MS is at the cutting edge at the moment while Apple seems to be doing really low level design where it is more decoration than design. Here, MS is really levelraging design with a lot of rigour, meaning and intent. Apple seems to have fallen off the wayside and resorted to … real world replication.
The central difference here, and you see it with how the type is rendered on the 2 systems, is that Apple doesn’t necessarily respect the medium. They long for the medium to be something it is not whereas MS seems to intrinsically understand the medium much more than Apple and in so doing, appropriately designs with that in mind.
It is the same problem in early web design (and even this day) where traditional desktop graphics designers design as if for print with the same considerations for print- but they are designing it for the web/online medium. There has been too many instances of me having to rework and reoptimise 300dpi designed, high resolution, 80MB homepages. On top of that, there is a sense that a lot of designers still don’t understand the screen as a medium hence don’t understand the online space as a medium; because they are instrinsically designing for the print medium.
This seems to be Apple’s issue as well. They are trying to shoehorn a different medium onto a new type of medium and covering that up with beautification and decoration.
Metro, we see, understands the medium and works within it and pushes it to its edge while still respecting its unique characteristics.
I’m not saying one way is right over the other but as a designer myself, I respect MS’s stance on this a lot more even if I personally believe Apple has the more visually appealing … “decorations”. We can look at how diametrically opposed these viewpoints are by simply looking at IOS game center and WP7’s Xbox hub. Here is the penultimate example of how differently they approach the same medium. Email on IOS and WP7 (metro) is also another huge example of this polar opposite view of things. It isn’t for no reason many reviews state clearly that WP7’s email experience is leaps ahead of other platforms even if it may lack feature-wise.
What you are absolutely right about though, is that it wasn’t Apple that was the design forward company. It was Microsoft. They started off with a clean slate and are in perpetual development and growth in the space of design whereas Apple started off with a fixed view of how it wanted computing (and medium) to be; and we see this as the reason why there hasn’t been such explosive, design shattering decisions from Apple. Their pov is predestined hence you see their advances coming more from decoration more than anything else (some ppl prefer that, some don’t).
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 3:36 AM EST reply Recommend (21) Flag actions
“This seems to be Apple’s issue as well. They are trying to shoehorn a different medium onto a new type of medium and covering that up with beautification and decoration.
Metro, we see, understands the medium and works within it and pushes it to its edge while still respecting its unique characteristics."
Way to fit 2700 words into two sentences! Really, though, this does distill it right down to its bare minimum. Apple has always designed as if the computer were printed media, and while it does serve them well as far as never seeming too out of date, I prefer Microsoft’s approach of designing for the medium.
All except for text rendering, as I mentioned above, but GDIPP fixes that!
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 12:50 PM EST reply Recommend (6) Flag actions
Thanks for the nice article and time to put it together.
I don’t get why people are making a big deal on skeumorphism. Sure, the apps may not look that nice, like Find My Friends, and Calendar, but it doesn’t affect interaction really. The iCal app is similar to before except the title bar is ‘leather’ instead of grey.
I don’t know if Apple has anything up its sleeves because they haven’t changed how iOS or OS X looked for as long as I remember, but I like how both OSs get out of my way when interacting with it and doesn’t frustrate me. I feel Windows Phone 7 is pretty, but it’s trying too hard and I have to swipe many time to go to another screen or find hidden settings. Also, almost everything animates in a ‘cute’ way which can be distracting.
In the end, all this comes to preference and I’m glad there are such different operating systems to choose from.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 8:48 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It doesn’t affect interaction until it does. Like the way in some apps you have to ‘flick’ over the page because it looks like a book, so it wouldn’t fit the look to just stick an arrow on the edge to go to the next page.
Posted on Dec 29, 2011 | 6:30 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Amazing article! I loved reading it! It is very professional and made me realize how different Apple and Microsoft’s philosophies are. This is what makes The Verge stand out!
Thank you for the amazing article and I hope you’ll continue writing some. It was well worth the read.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 8:31 AM EST reply Recommend (8) Flag actions
Thank you! Now that I have a little free time, I think I’ll be doing at least a few long-form articles for the forums here (and on my website… shameless plug)
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 12:47 PM EST reply Recommend (10) Flag actions
This was an interesting read, and I appreciate your effort in writing it. So thanks!
One thing I will disagree on is a minor thing, but your opinion of the Mac OS being a more timeless, classic design is one on which I can’t agree. When I look at the top menu bar and the icon dock at the bottom, I can’t help but feel like I’m looking at a computer from several years ago. I get that Apple makes tweaks to these things to help them age, but to my eyes, it just looks old. . . not classic. I’m sure this is one of those things that depends on one’s own tastes and sensibilities though. :)
Thanks again for the great read!
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 8:43 AM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
As you mentioned above, whether Apple’s design is timeless or not is largely based on your taste. Personally, I love Mac OS X’s UI. I’ve always liked Windows’ UI too but it seems that within a couple of month’s I feel like theming everything ‘cause it’s outdated. The same goes for iOS. I can’t really stand the design either. The only thing I don’t like with Mac is the 3D dock, the look of the 2D dock, and my desktop (icons, wallpaper, and Geektool mods). Oh and some of the software’s icons like the Finder’s dull and matte icon. Apart from that, I’d say that Mac OS X is pretty much timeless (especially compared to Windows). But then again, that is my opinion.
I’d say that the main reason why I do not like Window’s UI is that the change is always so radical and sometimes over the top. Had Windows 7’s UI been a little smaller, I would probably be longing for it even today. 7’s UI is great but I know that if I would use it for more than 6 months, I’d feel like wiping the disc. Actually, this is one of the reasons why I install Linux and not Windows on my desktop.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 9:01 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I personally found the UI variations used in Linux distros that I’ve used a bit inconsistent (which indeed depends on my personal preferences) – which variant of Linux, in terms of UI, is your favorite?
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 9:59 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I think my experience differs with Windows 7 so far because of the way I use my machine. I was just sitting here thinking about the programs I use the most. I use Chrome, IE9, and Zune constantly. I pop into Word and Excel a time or two a day, but I don’t spend a lot of time there.
In Chrome, the browser is just there. I have the transparency set pretty high so it’s just the tab and the minimize, maximize, and close buttons. IE gets a little tiring due to the boxiness of the tabs. They feel kinda clunky to me. I never get tired of Zune in fullscreen or mini player. Word and Excel are fine, but they’d probably get tiring to me if I used them constantly.
I auto-hide my taskbar and keep my desktop icons hidden.
I kinda feel like my experience with Win7 is that it is just there in the background. Nothing really sticks out to me very much in my daily use, but now that you’ve brought all this up, I’m sure I’ll be paying attention to it more. :) Cannot unsee.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 10:20 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I figured I’d have some dissenters on that point, and of course it’s all opinion. To me, I look at Mac OS, and I see something familiar, and yes, old, but old in the same way that antique furniture is old. I wouldn’t decorate my house with it, but if I went somewhere decorated in antiques, my thought wouldn’t be “This furniture is all old, they should update it.”
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 12:46 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Before I start, I want to congratulate Joe for this article – this is quality work – well researched, amply referenced and beautifully written.
Now to my point – the design philosophies of these two giants perhaps reflects a fundamental distance in the paradigms of the companies, and more importantly, their followers.
Apple stood fast to it’s classical interface design as not to unsettle it’s users – a long-time Mac user virtually has no learning curve to traverse when he transitions from one version of Mac OS (or iOS, for that matter) to another, apart from a bell there whistle here and a little bit of polish here, nothing would have changed. This, I guess, directly reflects the sentiments of the loyal followers of the company – they usually despise any radical redesign; which is, not in any manner, a bad thing – consistency and appreciation of it is a good thing.
Fans of Microsoft, on the other hand, tend to more readily embrace change. When they are presented with the the cutting edge of design, they find it no problem even if it makes them relearn a few tricks. Reflecting this philosophy, the company never passionately sticks to any design language, instead, it’s ready to erase everything it’s written in the past and go in a new direction altogether.
At the end, it’s simply a matter of preference, a choice between change and consistency.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 10:19 AM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
I’d like to make one more observation, which is about Metro.
Metro is much more a “design language”, in the “language” sense, and much more of a radical re-invention than Luna or Aero – as such, it more likely for Metro to stand the test of time a little longer than these interfaces did, unless people start to feel Microsoft has done something terribly wrong with it.
I’ll elaborate.
Firstly, Metro is nothing like the interfaces like we’ve seen so far. The current generation of interfaces is known by the self-explanatory name WIMP (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointers). Be it Apple, Microsoft, or the dozen Linux varations (the most prominent of them being GNOME3 and Unity), the fundamental principle is the same – there are icons which lauch programs and programs lauch in windows. These windows, ubiquitously, can be minimized, maximized, resized and closed. There are menus, buttons and toolbars which performs various actions.
Little of this has changed over the years, and little is different across platforms. All desktop interfaces (and to an extend, mobile interfaces) are variations of the same theme, different only in the mechanism and degree of visual polish, what is called “chrome”.
Metro is different in the sense that it rethinks this design pattern altogether – perhaps not entirely, but still, considerably. Icons have evolved into tiles – active blocks which can display real-time information. There are no windows in the conventional sense – applications are one large scrollable workspace with minimal pop-up windows or distractions. The entire notion about typography is rethought too, where the hitherto compact text in Windows (a vestige of the early design concept of designing for information density, as mentioned in the article) is eschewed for large, bold typography that literally pops out.
And finally, Metro puts minimalism upfront, and goes in the exact opposite direction of what user interfaces have come so far – by eschewing all sorts of visual embellishments for a plain, pure, matter-of-fact look.
Considering all this, I believe Metro is an interface revolution unlike Aqua, Luna and Aero, and hence will stand the test of time for maybe a decade to come. And let me not hide the fact, as you may have probably noticed by now, I’m a big fan of what Microsoft is doing with Metro, and I really hope it indeed does (stand the test of time).
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 11:32 AM EST reply Recommend (13) Flag actions
I agree completely. I did hesitate to call both Luna and Aero ‘languages’, but in the ends, the consistency of the colors, effects, and UI element appearance made up my mind. Metro is a very radical departure, and a welcome one. I hope you’re right, and I hope that in 2016, I won’t be looking at Metro, longing for something new.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 12:43 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
I consider Luna and Aero more to be “themes”.
Posted on Dec 18, 2011 | 1:08 AM EST reply Recommend (3) Flag actions
Agreed…. I personally see metro lasting far longer going forward. I also see luna and aero as themes built on windows…. nothing even close to metro.
I think you just need to look at the xbox for proof…. They “redesigned” the xbox dashboard 3 times since launch and now that the metro version is out it really feels like this will be the one they use going forward (obviously adding features and tweaking it overtime but the core metro UI of the live tile layout is the one they will use going forward…. and the next xbox will have a very similar look).
You will see a similar interface that scales on all 3 screens that ms has been talking about for years.
Posted on Dec 22, 2011 | 11:10 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Wowza. Nicely written!
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 11:49 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Thanks to everyone who took the time to read this! I do want to write some more long form content over then next few weeks. The next article might be one tearing down the functional UI designs, picking apart what works, and what doesn’t. (For a short version, I posted a long comment on Paul Miller’s “Condescending UI” article)
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 12:54 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Great work Joe… these articles are exactly what make the Verge such a great site.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 1:01 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
It’s important to point out that Apple has had it’s share of “dark times” in visual design where it apparently latches on to the “next cool thing” only to take it too far to the point of making me want to vomit in my mouth. Good examples of this are pinstripes and brushed metal in previous versions of OS X, and now the skeuomorphism present in OS X Lion with Address Book and iCal.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 1:05 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Agreed. I should have more explicitly mentioned the pinstripes and brushed metal. With Lion, however, I think they finally eliminated most of these things. There are still the horrible Address book and Calendar applications, but if you install something like Sparrow, you never have to see the mistakes this time around!
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 1:29 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
One thing I would like to ask is what do you think about the effect of the design language of third-party applications; it is one thing for the OS UI to be so carefully designed, but with a considerable amount of my time spent switching between multiple third-party applications for long periods, it is the lack of design consistency that affects my concentration, and my experience with the PC.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 7:12 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
That’s a really excellent point. Windows doesn’t have any sort of design standard for 3rd party applications, and that’s an issue. It’s something that Apple tackled in iOS, creating strict guidelines and standard interface elements, and to great effect. Most (good) programs on iOS really fit in with the UI because of it.
I don’t know for sure, but I’d assume Microsoft has the same sort of guidelines, though probably less absolute, for Metro, so it’s likely that we’ll see better coherence going forwards.
Posted on Dec 17, 2011 | 12:02 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
That’s the most jarring thing about most Windows Phone 7 apps. The ones that get Metro right really allow the content to shine. The ones that are just trying to copy their iOS counterpart app always just seem so terrible to enter into as the interface shift is pretty high.
Once app developers get behind and understand Metro a little more I’m excited to see the types of possibilities that exist.
Posted on Dec 20, 2011 | 11:00 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
OMG can’t agree more. Totally the current situation of WP7 apps. Some are mind-blowing and others look like pure shit (design-wise of course).
Posted on Dec 30, 2011 | 1:32 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Great article.
I was considering something the other day as I read a comment somewhere about Windows Phone live tiles being a ‘copy’ of Android widgets. I realised the first time I had ever seen anything similar (in my personal experience anyway) was active desktop … coming up to 15 years ago (with IE4 in 1997 according to wikipedia). I guess my point is that MS are kind of ahead in a lot of things but completely underappreciated at the same time.
Also thinking about the mac being based on print thing, does anyone else remember the Macintosh Portrait Display that was like an A4 page?
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 8:49 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
This is an enjoyable read. The kind of thing that should be in “Read this now!”
I think there would be a lot of room for a curated forum somewhere where the best of the forums (like this post) are linked in one place so they are easy to find. Kind of like the “Read this now!” feature for official The Verge content.
Posted on Dec 16, 2011 | 11:40 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Agreed.
I’ve been thinking for a while now that the Recommend function for posts need to be utilised better, so there’s a sort of an updating ‘Hall of Fame’ section clearly visible on the main forum page. With the posts exceeding a particular number of recommendations eligible, then sorted by post date (not by recs, otherwise it may create a mini-feedback loop), and posts older than a defined date begin to drop out of the Hall of Fame.
Posted on Dec 17, 2011 | 12:12 AM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
I concur.
Posted on Dec 17, 2011 | 12:21 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Nice article,.
Posted on Dec 17, 2011 | 1:16 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Great article, though it seems Microsoft are also taking cues from print design. You might find this article from Mike Kruzeniski one of the lead designers on Windows Phone 7 an interesting read.
Posted on Dec 17, 2011 | 8:12 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Oops.
And here’s the link: How Print Design is the Future of Interaction
Posted on Dec 17, 2011 | 8:13 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
MS is taking a lot of cues from the Swiss Style, but that doesn’t necessarily limit itself to print. A lot of the talks they give specifically point out the signage at airports and so on, or even packaging. Also just because it uses a grid doesn’t make it based on print – it just makes it work! Great article though, I really love all this stuff coming out of MS.
Out of interest I’d love to see if there are similar articles from Apple about the design language is iOS or OS-X Lion (I can’t find any). All I can find is people bitching about the leather! I read things like this – http://www.macstories.net/stories/os-x-lion-interface-tour/ – and I can’t even tell where it changed (apart from iCal of course).
Posted on Dec 17, 2011 | 11:30 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This should appear on the front page.
Make it happen.
Posted on Dec 18, 2011 | 1:03 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
I was hoping it’d show up on the “best of the forums” post, but looks like it didn’t make it…
Posted on Dec 18, 2011 | 11:24 PM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
There have been so many excellent posts that have gone ignored by “best of the forums”… Many of them from Microserfs, such as:
http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/9/2550666/minimalism-the-metro-experience
http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/15/2564705/risks-and-rewards-the-story-of-the-xbox
http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/4/2538603/why-does-microsoft-get-so-much-grief
http://www.theverge.com/2011/11/1/2529231/public-relations-a-systemic-issue-within-microsoft
Again, that’s just from this subsection. And even then, there’s some threads that I’ve forgotten or otherwise missed…
It’s frustrating, almost like whoever it is that updates that feature just quickly browses the board every week and picks threads at random.
A waste of some truly great content in my opinion.
Posted on Dec 19, 2011 | 2:01 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
You’ll be in best of the forums this week — this is awesome.
Posted on Dec 21, 2011 | 1:52 AM EST reply Recommend (7) Flag actions
Thanks, Nilay! I didn’t see this until today, and it really made my Christmas
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 12:50 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Bravo sir, excellent article. Though I disagree somewhat that Apple’s design shall remain timeless. Only time will tell.
Posted on Dec 18, 2011 | 5:33 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
this article is amazing! YOU ARE AWESOME!
Posted on Dec 19, 2011 | 12:04 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Brilliant article, well worth the read.
Just one question – do you think mainstream consumers are ready for the change that Metro brings? My father still complains that XP is better and easier to use than Windows 7. This in mind, how do you think he will (and many other non-tech geeks) react to Windows 8?
Posted on Dec 20, 2011 | 4:00 AM EST via mobile reply Recommend Flag actions
Out of curiosity, is there anything in particular he finds easier about XP than 7? I’m having a hard time figuring out a single thing for which that could be true. It’s basically the same interface, but with more features to make it easier.
As for windows 8, yeah, there will be a huge crowd of people who won’t give Metro a chance, who don’t want to learn a new interface, and take to the internet to complain about it. Doesn’t mean it’s better or worse, just different, and there are always people who don’t like change.
As for which will be easier, I believe Windows 7 will be easier overall, actually. Windows 8 seems to me to be a transitional operating system. It presents a new interface as the future of Windows, but does not do away with the old one. To people who have difficulty grasping computing concepts, the added layer of two different interfaces with two sets of applications that will only work in one environment or the other will be difficult.
However, if we take the split interface out of it, and compare only Metro to the current interface, Metro will be significantly easier, in my opinion. Windows Phone has shown that Microsoft knows how to make a simple, intuitive, but powerful interface, and I have no doubts that Metro will be the same.
All this being said, I have no used the Windows 8 preview yet, though I did play around with the Samsung tablet they handed out at Mix. I’ll be installing the preview right after Christmas, as I (think) I’m getting an SSD, so I’ll have to redo my computer anyways. And in case anyone’s wondering, I do use both Windows and Mac on a regular basis. My main desktop machine is Windows (as is my gaming PC and media PC), but my laptop is a MacBook Air.
Posted on Dec 20, 2011 | 5:52 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
the ribbon on the file manager will be great for the average user (although people who are more techy will not)
Posted on Dec 27, 2011 | 10:54 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Damn.
That’s it. Just “damn”
Great article!
Posted on Dec 20, 2011 | 4:52 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Awesome piece of work. Really enjoyed your thoughts on the differing design philosophies.
Posted on Dec 20, 2011 | 11:34 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I use and have always used windows exclusively. That said, in my opinion their interface design is atrocious next to Apple’s by modern day standards. Back in windows xp’s day I would have argued that Microsoft had the cleaner and more mature design, but as the operating systems have evolved I’ve increasingly found OS X to better match my tastes . Windows to this day is still designed by engineers rather than artists, and it shows . It looks and feels like crap. I’ve spent hours customizing it (which is actually quite frustrating) to my liking but at the end of the day it’s just crap with a pretty gown thrown on top.
How about a specific example? How about the completely pointless shortcut icons that are placed on every shortcut you make? Why is that even necessary? There’s a reason Josh called windows poison. It provides a terrible user experience.
There’s a lot of buzz about Metro right now. It’s different, I’ll give it that, but I’m still not buying it. Metro is just a text-driven design language, and behind the current you get the same old windows 7 experience. They stuck their foot out half-way with Metro and are still clinging to windows in every way they can, and it disgusts me.
Posted on Dec 21, 2011 | 1:02 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
You liked Luna better than Aqua, really?
I mean, each to their own and all.
But I find XP’s Luna to be, hands-down, the ugliest desktop interface I’ve ever seen.
But on the other hand, I much prefer Windows 7’s Aero to MacOSX’s current interface. By some distance.
Posted on Dec 21, 2011 | 6:19 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
I completely agree. XP felt childish. Windows 7 looks and feels more adult. It’s a matured XP that has lost it’s baby fat, gone through standard growing pains, and has developed into a handsome productive member of society. (Man, those teen years were awkward!)
I’m on the opposite side of Luph’s opinion. When I use OS X, the top menu bar feels like something I would have used with a computer in middle school, and the dock icons carry a nostalgia with them that reminds me of when I was in college 4 and 5 years ago. I know they’ve been updated to look more stylish, but it just feels old and dated. My feeling of this is probably why I auto-hide my taskbar in Windows 7. It gets out of my way, and I rarely have to be reminded of the interface that has been around forever now.
Posted on Dec 21, 2011 | 7:59 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I always thought XP was a Fisher-Price design and it’s pig ugly. Windows 7 is a lot more attractive, but as Peter Bright over at Ars has pointed out, scratch under the surface and there is much ugliness about Windows 7. There is just a complete lack of taste. “The operating system is ugly. First-party applications are ugly. Third-party applications are ugly. ”http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/guides/2010/10/the-21st-century-guide-to-platform-trolling-windows-sucks.ars/3" target="new">Wherever you look, there’s ugliness." Windows has design conventions, but even Microsoft (like everybody else doing design for Windows seems to ignore them). Aero was a gimmick and not even a good one.
I much prefer the way Apple does things. I like the top menu bar. It gives a consistency to working that is totally lacking in Windows. However, I do agree about the Dock. Mine doesn’t get used very often and I think most Mac geeks use something different. Before Lion a favourite of mine was DragThing, which I still use on occasion, but I now use Launchbar 5 most of the time.
Do Windows Users like new approaches? I would have to disagree with this as most seem very happy to stick to XP and the changes in Vista and 7 are often met with complaints.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 5:03 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
windows-sucks.ars
that has to be one of the most euphonic URLs I’ve ever seen :)
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 3:40 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Windows doesn’t really control third party applications. I personally hate iTunes on the PC – to me it makes no sense that they went to all the effort of actually making it look like a mac app with all the scrollbars, icons, textures etc. I just think about how inefficient that must be rather than using the built-in OS UI controls. In any case do you think MS should block iTunes on the PC unless it is done in the Windows 7 theme or Metro UI? I would love to see that happen – “Sorry Apple, your iTunes is too ugly for the PC”.
Anyway, how is a top menu bar in the OS any more consistent that a menu bar on each window – you can’t say Windows lacks consistency just because of that. One feature of Windows I use all the time is the quick launch bar, which is in the taskbar and persistent across everything.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 4:13 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Have you actually used the metro version? Metro is VERY inspired by the designers at the expense of the engineers. If anything its kinda funny because metro is the design mantra you would expect from somebody like apple and ios is what you would traditionally expect from ms.
Posted on Dec 22, 2011 | 11:21 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Great article! I am in the last few days of finishing a huge update to my Windows Phone app and i struggles with design so much. Being an iPhone users for over 3 years i was so used to that design language and experience, but after i got a Windows Phone to play around with i fell in love with it and barely use my iPhone anymore.
All that being said i was about 40% of the way through doing a iPhone app before i decided to jump ship cause i liked Windows Phone so much. This put me in a very weird place for a few weeks cause just as you said i started to build an iPhone app on the Windows Phone. I was about 80% done with the features when i looked at the app and just hated the look and i couldn’t understand why. On the iPhone i would have loved it but not in Metro. So i made a decision 1 night that i will design what i feel metro was trying to achieve. Now looking back and reading your article i am so happy i did cause that app looks beautiful and right now where my iPhone translation looked horrible.
Once again great article just wish i read it about 4 weeks ago which would have speed up the decision i already made.
Posted on Dec 22, 2011 | 12:16 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Well, this was just fantastic. I’m a design dilettante, so I appreciated the sheer readability of the piece. I disagree on one point – I don’t think that Aero feels outdated at all, and having used a Macbook Pro at work for four months I personally prefer it to OS X.
I think I saw a forum post saying that the best feature of The Verge was the forum, and posts like these are why.
Posted on Dec 22, 2011 | 2:22 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
You know what, i feel like you should write post like this for them part time or something. This post was fantastic, good work.
Posted on Dec 23, 2011 | 4:10 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I think everything Microsoft have been doing from Windows XP onwards is leading towards Metro. But unlike past design directions Microsoft have toyed with. Metro is a fundamental shift.
It has been described by others as akin to the move from Art Nouveau to Art Deco, which later on led to futurism and the foundation of Dutch typographic design and “the grid”, and I tend to agree.
Apple does seem to be languishing in the past, with faux leather, fabrics and glass, in the mistaken belief these are the things people are familiar with in real life as a metaphorical link between the physical and virtual worlds.
But I believe Microsoft’s “Authentically Digital” approach is more suitable as we ditch vestiges from the past and our social and everyday lives are now in the digital realm.
We no longer need to make these digital concepts approachable via the association with real world objects and concepts, as these have become the unfamiliar to our society.
Posted on Dec 23, 2011 | 7:50 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Absolutely, and I really hope I’m wrong about how I’ll see metro in 5 years or so, because I am absolutely in love with it right now!
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 12:51 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
great article!
If you are interested how the windows start menu evolved read this great blog item bij Stefen Sinofsky
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/03/evolving-the-start-menu.aspx
If you are interested in design choices of Metro you can should read this blog item
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/b8/archive/2011/10/04/designing-the-start-screen.aspx
Posted on Dec 23, 2011 | 10:14 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Loved the article! The Metro UI is really making me wanna jump to a WP7 phone but I wonder if an Android phone with a Metro theme could scratch that itch while waiting for the platform to mature a bit more. That’s my current dilemma!
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 4:16 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Mature in what way? Lack of apps? All the big apps are there and if you can’t find your exact app there is most likely a similar one.
I don’t get what people mean when they say they’ll wait for it to mature. If you like something support it, don’t wait for it to become popular and follow everyone else
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 4:48 PM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
My cloud solution is Dropbox. I’ve always used it and it’s not on WP7. I also like to play games when I’m bored, and generally just download random apps and you don’t have that many on the marketplace.
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 5:32 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
well what do you know, there’s a third party app for Dropbox. Well then…gonna have to think about this…
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 7:52 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It’s similar for me… I went out and bought an iPhone 3G before even the HTC G1 came out, and have been locked into iOS ever since, simply because I probably have over $200 in apps. It’s a huge ask to say “Not only should you drop those apps, you should buy them all again on another platform just because you like the UI”
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 12:53 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Why are you not already writing for The Verge
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 4:23 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Thanks so much :)
I certainly wouldn’t turn down the opportunity if offered!
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 12:45 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Fascinating debate.
While the hardware is not part of the debate, I do see a correlation between Apples interest in photorealism and textures, and the future adoption of retina displays.
How this impacts UI design on larger format displays I do not know, however Metro does not seem to be a visual metaphor that can demonstrate the richness of ultra high resolution displays going forward, “authentically digital” or not.
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 5:12 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I disagree; in fact I’d love to see Metro applied to colour e-ink, just something I’ve been thinking about since my wife got a Kindle for Christmas! The typography base of Metro could really work.
I disagree about retina displays being perfect for textures like leather or linen since it isn’t tactile in any way – doesn’t feel like leather, linen or anything else. It would be even worse if it looked exactly like linen and felt like glass.
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 11:15 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m also inclined to agree with mgk69. When you’re using ‘real world’ sort of textures, you can get away with a lower resolution, because the variation of color can trick the eye. Metro’s super clean lines and fonts cold really benefit from very high resolutions.
Like in games, the only time aliasing is apparent is in the straight edges of the geometry. The two solutions are anti-aliasing (or font smoothing ) and very high resolutions. If we could get resolutions high enough to obviate the need for font smoothing, I think Metro would look incredible!
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 12:41 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
Certainly going to be interesting to see how this will play out, it’s good to have an alternative paradigm in the mix.
Possibly not the place to discuss this aspect, however, does the reliance on western language forms and left to right reading limit the development of metro to western countries- or has metro already been translated into other language forms.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 1:23 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I found this though so I guess the support is on there now with Mango – http://windowsteamblog.com/windows_phone/b/windowsphone/archive/2011/07/06/windows-phone-around-the-world-language-support-in-mango.aspx
I read an article about the Lumia getting a release in China, I think first half of next year? China is an odd case as you need to add in a bunch of censorship “features”.
Off topic but this made me wonder – can you buy a macbook pro or iMac with a chinese keyboard? I was considering the Apple ecosytem in Asian countries – if you can’t buy the computers then maybe the phone would have less traction in the market?
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 3:35 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Incredible article
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 5:28 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I hated Luna when it came out and I never changed my mind. IN fact I hated it so much I immediately switched the UI back to “classic” and never went back. Aero was the leap forward I was looking for!
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 5:34 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Totally agree here. Luna was important because it was Microsoft’s first attempt at a ‘fully designed’ interface, but it was a miss in my opinion. It’s what made Aero so beautiful when it finally arrived.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 12:42 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This is a great article that I will end up reading multiple times. Well done Sir.
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 6:49 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Amazing article! What’s your blog/website, if you have one? I’ll definitely read it.
I wrote something somewhat similar, if you feel like reading it, it’s on the forums here or my blog here. Not nearly as detailed or well written, but I think I came to some of the same conclusions, so it might be interesting to you.
Love to hear some feedback from anyone.
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 6:49 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
My site is joedombrowski.com, though there’s not a lot of writing on there yet. I have a paper on the history and current state of parallel computing, and a couple more academic papers to come, but this is my first article of this type. It will appear on my site soon, and I do intend to write more things like this, it was a lot of fun.
I opened your links in the background, and I’ll take a look soon. Too tired tonight!
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 12:44 AM EST reply Recommend (1) Flag actions
One hell of a article. Thanks for one entertaining read.
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 8:58 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
It isn’t too often someone attempts to analyze design philosophies. Good article, and I agree overall. I don’t think design was important to Microsoft until after 2000. Look at the terrible design in PowerPoint until after 2000. Atrocious. XP’s Luna is garish. Aero, on the other hand, is excellent.
Apple’s OS X interface (along with the rest of the OS) has been steadily improving since 2000. A lot of Mac users were expecting a radical re-design ~2007 that didn’t happen. I think the interface in Lion is excellent, very practical, but not incredibly flashy. Lion has some tweaks to buttons that are very well done. I know some people don’t like the “real” materials in the interface.. While not my favorite (except for the linen), they don’t bother me.
Bot
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 9:02 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Great read!
Posted on Dec 25, 2011 | 9:45 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I’m floored by all the positive feedback I’ve received here. You all (and The Verge) have really made this Christmas memorable for me!
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 12:54 AM EST reply Recommend (4) Flag actions
Great articles always receive great feedback! Quality of readers has improved since quite sometime now ;)
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 2:34 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Great read, really enjoyed it. One thing you have to ask yourself tho is how you define design. Since it’s part of your research question it should be clearly defined in your lead-up. I’m sure you know what you’re talking about but it could be made more clear to the reader. For instance, is a design-driven company one that over and over changes it’s aesthetics for something new and seemingly unrelated to the previous one? Or is it one that thought it through from the beginning and stuck to one design? I’m sure you can tell where I come down on this but that’s not the point, you should just make it clear what you think. Very good article nonetheless, really brought something new to the discussion. Keep up the good work!
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 1:02 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This article is incredible!
I’m really looking forward if Metro UI will thrive. It works perfectly on a phone but I have my doubts about the desktop version. 4 years from now, we’ll see if it worked out. Maybe people will look back at the older Windows interface and wonder how on earth we could cope with that.
Here’s one thing about the article though: I wish you would have mentioned the recurring theme in Microsoft designs. It’s all about windows and how to make them useful and simple to all people. This is what fascinates me about Metro UI. It takes the idea of Windows to a new level we haven’t seen yet.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 1:50 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
nice article!
i agree that microsoft is making new things…
but i see where apple is heading to..
As we all know that apple has always brought best displays in its macs and i think the next big thing in display sector will be 3D. So the apple design like bookshelf and so on will make lot of sense, when it comes to that.
i really like simple design and a clean desktop. and feel good with it. For me Metro is a mess..
but for lot of people here it seems ok and good. i think its best for the people with lots of icons on their desktop.
lets wait and see what it will be like working with Metro. I love working with Aero theme in Win7 now and i may also like metro after its completion.
i say go Microsoft and Apple and hope that google will not bring some OS as Opensource thing… that will make everything go wrong…;-)
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 8:06 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
This is a very good article, incredibly refreshing. Thank you – I mean it – for writing this.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 8:30 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Great article. Change (Microsoft) Vs Constant (Apple). Metro for a change is going to stick around more than we expect it to. Microsoft has done a great job with their UI design this time.
Sometimes, I really wonder how (and why) people always believe in whatever Apple says (advertises). This probably has something to do with the mindset of people that are attracted by the philosophies of these 2 different giant houses of technology.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 2:33 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Since Aero only lasted 5 years before Metro was introduced, why should we expect Microsoft to not pull the rug out in 2016 again?
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 5:53 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
But if they leave the option to use the Windows 7 interface in Windows 8 they are derided for “dipping a toe” into a change of the UI, not committing fully to the change etc. etc.
MS will continue to release service packs for Windows 7, so security issues, updates to things like IE or Media Player etc. should be covered. If you prefer Vista keep running it, if you prefer Windows 7 you can stick with it, if you prefer Windows 8 when 9 comes out I assume they will have no problem with that.
I think Aero was a response to increased computing power, Metro is a response to decreased computing power – as in netbooks and tablets. The Windows 8 developer preview runs fine on my 3 year old laptop, and it will probably continue to run fine on my laptop when it is 5/6 years old.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 8:22 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
I think that there is definitely a corollary article that should be written as a companion piece, which examines current OSes (primarily OS X, Windows, and perhaps Android) against companies’ (or perhaps simply technologists) perceive what “Future Design” will be, and if they are working to meet what that future will look like.
I think that future technology most likely break down into multiple groupings of ideas (1: continuous computing as a platform, 2: simplification of applications, 3: increased complexity of back-end platforms for applications) — but with radically different implementations within these groups. For example, Blackberry’s vision of “the future” involves more keyboard-centric applications, while Microsoft’s involves speak-to-translate, and direct-video perceptions.
While it’s difficult to divine what others see as “the future of computing,” I think that many companies understand that they will need to position their operating systems around what “future productivity” looks like — but the major pitfall is that since no companies agree in regard to what this productivity will entail, they don’t design around it, instead preferring to stay to a standard of present-productivity until there is a disruption forcing them to change their design principles.
The only hiccup in this idea comes from the consumerization of IT: as the world increases in number of fragmented devices, how a single “future platform” can ever come about is a daunting problem, one which I doubt can be solved easily…
Hm, nevermind. It was an interesting idea, but the last part puts a nail in it.
Posted on Dec 26, 2011 | 4:59 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
i prefer the rain meter window 8 skin to the actual one
Posted on Dec 27, 2011 | 10:05 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
apple’s philosophy- if it ain’t broke don’t fix it
Microsoft’s philosophy- new is always better
Posted on Dec 27, 2011 | 10:44 PM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Um, false? I’m hardly an Apple fan, but I do admire Apple’s determination to always push the envelope. The story of Steve Jobs’s relentless pursuit of perfection in the original Macintosh strongly disagrees with your analysis of Apple’s philosophy. I love Microsoft too, and I am a fan of many of their products, but it’s okay to appreciate them bolth. :)
Posted on Dec 30, 2011 | 10:53 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Excellent article and I enjoyed reading it.
I’m a Windows user mainly, and I do agree with your observations on Windows design changes. MS makes those changes based at least in part with anticipation of what the hardware is capable of. Metro reflects the anticipation of touchscreen and gestures coming to the fore.
Posted on Dec 30, 2011 | 12:18 AM EST reply Recommend Flag actions
Dear the Verge,
Someone please offer this man a job. Thank you.
In all seriousness, I can’t say agree with everything you’ve written here, but I thoroughly enjoyed the read – thank you!
Posted on Dec 30, 2011 | 12:01 PM EST reply Recommend (2) Flag actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.