

Why Windows 7 is not the answer - dcurtis
http://blog.dustincurtis.com/day-8045-windows-7-is-not-the-answer

======
jneal
So tell me, how do we make Windows 7 better? Do we make decisions for our
users and then complaints for not offering options? Where is the medium here,
and how is such a thing even remotely close to a reason why Windows 7 is not
the answer? You answer this dialog once after you first install, and you never
see it again if you use recommended settings. So what's so confusing about
that?

~~~
mynameishere
Make a non-idiot mode. When non-idiot mode is activated the following occurs:

#1 All folders show "name" "extension" "size" "date created" "date modified"
and nothing else. All alterations made by the user are automatically filtered
into the entire filesystem. Don't ever "guess" what a directory is for.
Computers are shit at guessing things.

#2 When I try to change a .png extension to .jpg I don't want alerted that
this will "make the file unusable". That is an insult to my intelligence.

#3 When I try to delete a file that another process has a lock on you TELL ME
WHAT GODDAMNED PROCESS HAS A LOCK ON IT so I can kill it.

#4 The GUI should look like windows 2000, no fussing with silly transparent
windows or Mac wanna-be bullshit. I avoid macs for the same reason I avoid the
Candyland.

#5 All files are assumed to be text files unless otherwise associated with
other applications. That is, if I click on phat.properties, load it into
whatever phat.txt would have been loaded into, most likely notepad.

#6 I use notepad more than almost any other application. It's time to start
giving it more features. I'll bet there are 100 hackers at microsoft who would
love to make notepad into a new emacs.

#7 Port every popular unix utility (grep, locate, sed, whatever) to windows
and let me run them from the command prompt.

#8 Switch backslashes to forward slashes.

#9 Bring back qbasic gorilla.

~~~
snprbob86
I detest the idea of a "non-idiot mode" or "expert mode". Software doesn't
need to be complicated to be powerful.

#1 Google Docs has a fantastic organizational tool which is much better suited
to the task than a traditional file system.

#2 Why are we messing with file names anyway? Flickr doesn't force me to think
about this problem.

#3 Why can't I _unlink_ a file instead of deleting it? Why should I have to
kill a process?

#4 _shrug_ Beautiful is welcome if you don't suck down my resources too badly.

#5 Again, normal users are forced to interact with file systems far too often.

#6 If you like Emacs so much, why don't you just use Emacs?

#7 PowerShell comes with Windows 7... or you can install Cygwin.

#8 _shrug_ both technically already work nearly everywhere.

You are proposing "solutions" to common problems you have had. Your solutions
have a remedy nature to them. You exhibit the traditional Microsoft band-aid
mentality. Microsoft's culture is designed around managing complexity. We're
damn good at coming up with complex solutions to complex problems. We are very
weak at deriving simple solutions to complex problems. However, more
importantly, we are very weak at identifying important problems to solve, and
hence simplifying the needs for solutions. It seems to me like you would fit
right in here. That is not necessarily a good thing.

~~~
mynameishere
_If you like Emacs so much, why don't you just use Emacs?_

Not the point. Microsoft has had a blank-slate opportunity with things like
calc and notepad but has squandered them. Why not make calc the world's best
calculator? Why not make notepad the best text editor? Instead, those apps are
just like the 1998 versions, while they've diddled with the meaningless start
menu and control panel for probably 200 million dollars in man hours.

~~~
dcurtis
Microsoft is not _capable_ of making the world's best calculator or the
world's best notepad.

That's the real problem.

~~~
brown
"Not capable" can have two meanings. First, you could mean that Microsoft
engineers lack the skill and ability to make a better calculator or text
editor. Second, you could mean that Microsoft's hands are tied by a variety of
reasons (legacy support, antitrust concerns, etc).

I know it's popular to assume Microsoft's incompetency, but that's not the
case here.

Many engineers internally have proposed changes and provided patches that
could drastically improve the functionality. However, the gatekeepers are
incredibly conservative. Not only do they have to consider the legacy issues,
but they also have to consider all of the ISVs who would kick and scream about
anti-trust. The subset of the customer base who would truly appreciate a
better notepad do not justify the risks.

------
pedalpete
Dustin is absolutely right that Microsoft needs to figure out a better way of
'what needs to happen automagically, and what doesn't'. The other side of this
is of course the mac. With my mac I often feel like it's doing a bunch of
things for me, and not letting me know what that is. I think Mac goes to far
in the other direction.

~~~
pkulak
Like what, exactly? I'm not trying to be a dick, I just really can't think of
anything. All the stuff my Mac does automatically seems to be standard OS
stuff that I really don't need to deal with personally each and every time.
Like connecting to a wireless network without giving me a giant, sticky
notification that it's done so.

~~~
whacked_new
Applications install.

It could be really simple, but it's definitely not obvious: With Windows, you
go through the installer. With Linux, you (often) go through the command line.
Mac: drag somewhere, run. Where'd it go? Where do other users find it?

The completeness of the installer packages also varies. They don't tell you
drag to the same place.

Comfort with all these quirks, regardless of OS, are highly habit-dependent.
Once you really know what's going on, that OS is your "answer." To me, the
issue in the article is merely about conversion and new customers.

~~~
DougBTX
> Where'd it go?

I know you didn't mean it like this, but this is actually an interesting
question. On Windows, the files probably went into the Program Files
directory, but if you try to go there in Windows explorer, you get a "these
are system files, keep out" warning. Which is quite correct, you wouldn't
expect an end user to open an application from Program Files, there will
probably be a bunch of unrelated exes to distract you.

So where is it? I guess the answer is "in the start menu". People probably
believe that abstraction, to the point that MS had to put a "this is just a
shortcut, you need to use add remove programs to actually delete the
application" message.

Package managers, much the same story. Where are the binaries? In a versioned
repository somewhere, on mac ports somewhere under /opt/local. How do you run
them? Type their name in the command line, often you ignore where the files
actually are.

And finally, back to OS X itself. How do you install an application? Drag it
into the applications directory.

Where is it? It's in Applications. How do you run it? Go to Applications and
double click on it.

The only case I've pointed to where the answers to "how do I install it",
"where is it" and "how do I run it" end up in the same place, the Applications
directory, is where you point out a usability issue. User interface design is
hard!

My guess is it comes down to expectations. "Go to the Applications folderand
click on the application I want to run? It can't possibly be that simple!" and
then spend 15 minutes looking for a pull down menu to launch the application.

~~~
whacked_new
Yup, expectations is right. When I started out, I was dragging apps to the
dock and the desktop -- and they worked! I did this even to huge packages
(100+ MB) and they just worked with no process. It was mysterious, almost
disconcerting. And if I did things this way, other users didn't know where to
find them.

Then you have other packages which launch the installer. As longwinded as they
are, they give me a sense of control and make me feel more comfortable even if
the same process is happening.

You can tell that I'm a latecomer to the OS X scene; frankly still don't know
where the apps are going, but because it is hidden from me already, I don't
want to bother. I always launch with spotlight and I have only opened the
Applications folder once.

MacPorts was also highly confusing: you get a second Python. OpenCV installs
to the system, PIL installs to ports. Now I'm sure there's a way to do so-and-
so, but coming from w32/linux, it's just download, install.

------
makecheck
The best way to design an error message is to figure out why you need it in
the first place, and eliminate that "need" (i.e. you don't display any
message). If the proverbial house isn't burning down, the user doesn't need to
know. Most messages can be non-modal, tucked away in a conspicuous spot but
not immediately stopping whatever the user is doing. Even _those_ can often
close themselves, not requiring acknowledgment, ever.

Somewhere along the line, people forgot that computers are supposed to be
tools, and decided it was okay to put up with constant interruptions to their
work. I swear, using Windows is like raising a small, needy child.

------
dhouston
Probably what happens when no one's in charge and the legal, backwards
compatibility, etc. teams have veto power over the UX people.

See also: (re: windows vista shutdown UI)

[http://moishelettvin.blogspot.com/2006/11/windows-
shutdown-c...](http://moishelettvin.blogspot.com/2006/11/windows-shutdown-
crapfest.html)

~~~
iigs
It's nice to see a concrete example of the "design-by-committee" that MS is
accused of with windows.

 _In Windows, the node I was working on was 4 levels removed from the root._

This is terrifying. It sounds like the Windows development process is about to
collapse under its own complexity.

~~~
dandelany
While I agree with you, I'd be interested to know if there are any
'intelligent' solutions to this problem. You can't possibly just have
thousands of devs checking into one central SVN repo, can you? Any idea how
Apple does it?

~~~
dcurtis
Apple has less than 1% the number of developers working on OS X than Microsoft
has working on Windows. Im sure the problems are a lot easier to deal with.

~~~
dandelany
Interesting. Do you have a source for those numbers? I can't seem to find data
about this anywhere.

------
donniefitz2
I have installed this version of W7 on a few machines and never encountered
this message. Not to say it didn't happen, but it seems to be an exception and
not the rule.

It seems to me that ruling out an OS because of a single, albeit lame, dialog
box is serious hyperbole. Windows 7 is a serious advancement for Microsoft by
any account.

This is a RC and it needs tuning. I'm not sure I know of an OS that "is the
answer". I'm not looking for an identity in an OS. I'm looking for a useful
tool. If you are looking for the answer in a computer operating system, you
are going to be seriously disappointed.

Get your expectations in order and give it a fair shake.

------
old-gregg
Nah, it's not just Microsoft, it's the accepted and assumed by default idiotic
behavior of windows software. My friends' Logitech mouse driver greets him
every morning, it politely asks him if he wishes to "Download the latest
incoming messages from Logitech", to what he replies "No, thank you". Every
goddamn morning.

------
seshagiric
Personally I think this is one more "why lose a chance to bad mouth MS" kind
of post.

Like pedalpete points, its a design choice: Windows seems to dump more
decisions to the user whereas Mac is on the other extreme.

Of course the dialogs like that are silly but why judge Win7 based on that. I
am using Win7 since beta and my Toshiba tecra has never been faster. The setup
took less than 20 mins and no crash since I installed in Jan. No driver
availability issues like with Vista.

If you are a Windows guy, I do think Win7 is the answer.

~~~
GHFigs
_Of course the dialogs like that are silly but why judge Win7 based on that._

Because the dialogs are part of Windows 7, and they represent a distinct user
interaction paradigm that exists throughout the operating system. Why
shouldn't you judge an OS that you will be using regularly based on how it is
designed to interact with you?

~~~
seshagiric
Its not like each and every dialog you get in Win7 is meaningless.

~~~
GHFigs
The point is that this isn't a bug or fluke or outlier, it's just an extreme
example of the usual Windows model of interaction.

------
tophat02
Well I do think 7 is a step in the right direction, but you're right, this
dialog is _horrible_.

You know what I'd like to see? An "Engineering Windows 7" blog entry that
explained exactly why Microsoft found it necessary to include this abomination
in their flagship product.

~~~
iigs
There's probably an overarching design requirement that their software not
contact MS's servers for privacy reasons.

The buttons should be in a different order, and the wording should be changed,
though.

------
tow21
Actually, I think the biggest problem with this dialog box is not that it's
present, it's that the question makes no sense.

As best I can tell, it's actually two questions merged into one, though the
answers are still separated out, except the answer to the second question
seems to depend on the first; but the first question isn't simply yes/no, it's
yes/no(A)/no(B)/no(C), and by the time I've finished trying to parse the
question and the proffered answers I've given up caring.

I can guess at what it's asking, but I'm a software developer. How is a normal
end-user supposed to make an even halfway-informed choice?

If Windows is going to push these choices out in front of me, it needs to ask
questions users can understand.

------
psyklic
I agree with the poster, but unfortunately since Windows tries to cater to
everyone they often cater to noone. If they put the dialog in, people
complain. If they leave it out, people complain. I only know what would make
me happy, not all of the other Windows users.

------
likpok
As the author noted, this is _Release Candidate_ software. Bugs like this are
supposed to get ironed out here before it is released to market.

These kinds of bugs can often be difficult to catch because when I am
debugging things, I often click through dialogs without really reading them.
Of course they say what they're supposed to (and it makes sense), because I
wrote them!

It's like having someone else proof-read a paper. If not, you'll just fill in
the holes yourself.

~~~
anigbrowl
It's not a bug, it's a feature. I actually mean that, it strikes a balance
between 'sure, do your thing computer' and 'no, I would like to specify
exactly what should happen'.

This approach has been built into Windows for a long time and I like it. I
have a mix of hardware in my computer and some I configure automagically but
some I need to set up manually. I suspect the blogger cited in the OP has
never had to do technical support for a living.

