blog Where Microsoft Has

[Dashel]

A better example CJ, though its really just an iTunes clone (that does drop the skeuomorphs interestingly). Can you find one that isn't a media player targeted at iDevices? Songbird looks similar too, but again, its meant to be a clone.

Firefox and Chrome have influenced IE, not Safari. I can agree Apple has a degree of influence in the broader, more fashionable design sense (glossy buttons), to call that immense on UI design is laughable to me.

Zune is very 'usably' dense without going off the iTunes deep end.

Great examples rfirth.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

No, that's not an alternative. That's another skeuomorph.

It's more obvious what the problem is when you look at Apple's calendar. Leather at the top. Stitching. And a torn look at the top to simulate that the previous page has been torn off.

Find My Friends... No consistence with iCal. The fake stitching is different.

Really?

Cool! A fake bookshelf! How thought-provokingly creative!

Photo Booth. Look at the fake wood, curtains, and fake dial on the bottom left.

Contacts! Cool! It's a book!

What's your argument here? By the way, the leather stitching is thankfully gone as of today with the release of Mountain Lion. I would agree that it didn't look good (and FMF looks weird to me too). Just an aesthetic judgement, that's all. Skeuomorphism can look bad just as 'digital authenticity' (whatever that's supposed to mean) can look bad.

[Rudy]

What's your argument here? By the way, the leather stitching is thankfully gone as of today with the release of Mountain Lion. I would agree that it didn't look good (and FMF looks weird to me too). Just an aesthetic judgement, that's all. Skeuomorphism can look bad just as 'digital authenticity' (whatever that's supposed to mean) can look bad.

He has a point, if there's a thing I hate about OSX it's the skeumorphism (or whatever it's called). Second would be the fact that iTunes never adhere to the design standards of the rest of the OS

[BajiRav]

I wouldn't call the Zune interface very dense. There's a lot of white space.

I meant it is the most info dense among the metro apps. Also I think "lot of white space" shouldn't be a metric for information density. I know it sounds backwards but then I don't want my mp3 player to look like Excel :p

[BajiRav]

What's your argument here? By the way, the leather stitching is thankfully gone as of today with the release of Mountain Lion. I would agree that it didn't look good (and FMF looks weird to me too). Just an aesthetic judgement, that's all. Skeuomorphism can look bad just as 'digital authenticity' (whatever that's supposed to mean) can look bad.

well there is still game center and its butt ugly interface or address book.

[rfirth]

well there is still game center and its butt ugly interface or address book.

Wow. I just looked at screenshots of Game Center. I am speechless.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

The question is: Does skeuomorphism lead to bad looking interfaces. I'd argue, no, it doesn't. Whether something's modeled after a real-life object or pixel-flat as it can be simply doesn't by itself tell you anything about how good it potentially looks. Or how well it works - its usability. In some cases it may be appropriate to bring real life elements into your UI, in others it isn't. The fight isn't between skeuomorphism vs. flat interfaces, but good design vs. bad design. And design isn't just what it looks like, it's what it feels like, how easy it is to use, how much you enjoy using it. For example, in my opinion, Microsoft is simply bad at subtle design elements like gradients and gloss in their UI. They usually exaggerate and make it look garish. So i'm totally in favor of a new approach for them where they go for total simplicity and clarity in their UI, get rid of all ornamentation and simply don't even try to lend their Ui some depth.

[rfirth]

The question is: Does skeuomorphism lead to bad looking interfaces. I'd argue, no, it doesn't. Whether something's modeled after a real-life object or pixel-flat as it can be simply doesn't by itself tell you anything about how good it potentially looks. Or how well it works - its usability. In some cases it may be appropriate to bring real life elements into your UI, in others it isn't. The fight isn't between skeuomorphism vs. flat interfaces, but good design vs. bad design. And design isn't just what it looks like, it's what it feels like, how easy it is to use, how much you enjoy using it.

Skeuomorphism isn't bad when used appropriately. Sometimes people just don't know when to stop. The "desktop" idea isn't bad, and that's a skeuomorph. But you don't want each program window looking like a piece of paper stacked on your desk and a wood wallpaper to simulate a desk.

[savourymonkey]

You only have to briefly look around the web and other modern app designs (even third party designs for iOS) to see that the Swiss or International Style from which Metro takes its cues and which has informed magazine and television presentation for years, is catching on more widely. This is not without reason. Where Microsoft has succeeded with Metro (Windows Phone, Zune and to a lesser extent the XBox dashboard), it has worked very well, and, whilst all aesthetics are a matter of personal taste, it would be difficult to argue that these products are not more attractive than offerings from their rivals (WP vs. iOS (Apple apps anyway) and Zune vs iTunes or WMP). The simplicity and focus on content afforded by this style is visually appealing and more importantly facilitates quick, easy, unadorned and uninterrupted access to your content.

The problem for Microsoft is that, whilst this works very well in non-interactive media like print and television, and almost as well in single purpose apps (as you would expect to find on a phone or tablet), it tends to fall down in complex interactive environments. Hence, whilst some may like the pared down visual of Office 2013, or the proposed interface for the Win8 desktop, these applications are in truth no more metro that their Win7 counterparts, and they do not adhere to that international style. Good thing too, really, as the only way of making them do so would be to reduce functionality, or at least make almost all functionality hidden from the user.

It is in these environments that MS's cursory nod to Metro makes less sense. In a desktop app with many interactive elements, drop shadows, gradients, bevels all serve a purpose of letting a user know immediately what the function of elements is. In a complex app, this immediate visual distinction, entirely unwarranted in non-interactive media, websites or phone/tablet apps, serves a usability purpose. Apple's design for some apps does feel dated, and Microsoft should be praised for attempting consistency, but they should recognise that the traditional desktop and desktop apps will be an unavoidable part of life until someone comes up with a radically new way of interacting in a very precise, specific way (as opposed to vagueness of touch), and they should design with this in mind.

I would still praise them for striving to achieve the Metro ideals in their products, but I did recoil a little in horror at the Win8 start screen. I am not sure what element of Metro that font rendering and those colours are meant to highlight, but, for me at least, they are a clear sign that there is much work to be done for Windows 9.

[Subhadip]

Regarding information density, a very important system wide feature of Windows 8's Metro UI is often overlooked - semantic zoom. There are pretty easy shortcuts to activating it, using touch, mouse+keyboard, mouse-only or keyboard-only. So you have an information dense view when you need to navigate, and a comfortable and pleasant view when you need to consume. It is a brilliant solution that gets the best of both scenarios.

[winrez]

No it wasn't.My assertion was that pretty much any (noteworthy) software out there nowadays has been influenced by Apple software design. The superbar is an example of that.

As if all Apple software was full of skeuomorphism. Unless you're including stuff like shadows, 3d buttons, gloss, shading etc. which is indeed part of pretty much any software out there.

On the other hand, Apple has, in modern times, once again pioneered the concept of less is more in software design, and it has caught on in a big way. Just look at what MS is doing with Metro nowadays. You don't think that had anything to do with Apple? You have to see beyond the superficial a bit. Metro doesn't look like iOS, but it surely has similar design goals and was clearly influenced in some way by it.

:D

[Seabizkit]

I can't speak for every mac user, But FFS really get over yourselves.

I am either for this or for that.... but Mac user seem to take it so personally, like they can't not detach from Mac.

Mac is pretty... doesn't mean its better UI, and Windows can also be pretty too.

I argue this..... Andriod UI and Iphone UI, and now Windows Phone UI, is this not better for the avg User?

Namely the core concepts from Andriod 4.0.4 or iphone ISO 5., buttons/tiles pages that you swipe

now..... if they work well as a UI, what is so hard to conserve, that this is not a good idea to move this over to the desktop "FOR THE AVG USER!!!"

E-mail, FaceBook, Internet.... Internet .... Internet, Calculator,... i don't even know what most people do, i think that sums it up.

Windows 8 gives you the option to use normal Desktop or Metro, for simple day to day items, Metro is a better design.... its touch friendly!!!!!!

In the next 4 years what type of screen would you rather have? and WHY?

A NON-touch screen or touch screen, and price was not an issue.

So you stick with Mac, great nothing wrong with that...

is the Mac desktop designed for touch? is it touch friendly?... do you care... maybe not... is your touch screen more useful? No...

How can Mac OS become more touch friendly?

Where is the market going.... more phones, smart phones, ipads, tablets/tab, laptops or more desktops?

If you were building an OS out of you own money and wanted to future proof your effects

as who would build something that only lasted a really short while.

which one would you design for and why?

[Shadrack]

Wow, that's what the Podcast app looks like on iPad? That IS terrible. I didn't see what all the fuss was about because I've only been using it on my iPhone which I think it looks OK for (its not Track 8, but it is OK).

But, wow, looking at that iPad version of the app I think I'm going to go puke now :x. Apple's QA may be dropping :(.

Anyway, they updated the app and it seems a lot snappier now so I'm happy.

[Shadrack]

@Seabizkit : +1 to you. hahahaha. This comment below really made me laugh:

E-mail, FaceBook, Internet.... Internet .... Internet, Calculator,... i don't even know what most people do, i think that sums it up.

People basically arguing on what platform they can "E-Mail, Facebook, Internet... Internet... Internet, and Calculator" the hardest. Definitely sums it up nicely.

[teddysnook]

I have joined just to say. I use Microsoft at work and Apple at home. Both have the good and bad points. I love the access to software on the apple but I love the ease of use on the Microsoft platform. they seem to me to be coming together.

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

:D

Clearly it's not a one-way street. Apple have been "influenced" by tons of stuff, too. :D

Skeuomorphism isn't bad when used appropriately. Sometimes people just don't know when to stop.

True. And I'd agree that Apple have gone overboard with this at times. In some cases they have already corrected their course a little bit. It's also good that there's choice and that MS is trying the exact opposite visually, so we may see how well or not that works in practice. :)

[The King of GnG]

Microsoft has WAAAY more taste in ****ing off its loyal customers, I dare to say. Windows 8 is a frocking punch in the guts for me....

[bandit_liberty_rumble]

Microsoft has WAAAY more taste in ****ing off its loyal customers, I dare to say. Windows 8 is a frocking punch in the guts for me....

Microsoft must be doing something right to be able to inspire so much hate recently. Sometimes you have to be willing to **** off some of your users to move forward for the benefit of most of your users. :p

[The King of GnG]

Microsoft must be doing something right to be able to inspire so much hate recently. Sometimes you have to be willing to **** off some of your users to move forward for the benefit of most of your users. :p

That's highly questionable: as a matter of fact, Metro UI is one step forward for touch interfaces and TWO steps backward for PC interfaces. And guess what? Windows is used on personal computers, mostly, not portable gadgets. So Microsoft is ****ing off almost ALL of its users for a new audience that's theoretical at best, I don't see how this could be described as "something right"....

[Boz]

I think hell just froze over because I find myself agreeing with Boz. :rofl:

:) You know you agree with me more then you don't ;)

[Growled Member]

Microsoft must be doing something right to be able to inspire so much hate recently. Sometimes you have to be willing to **** off some of your users to move forward for the benefit of most of your users. :p

Assuming most of their customers agree with them. If I were a betting man I would bet they will not.

[BannanaNinja]

Another thing to keep in mind is how hard is it to get Widows XP users to upgrade? And much harder will it be to get Windows 7 users to upgrade? Most people will be contempt will 7 for a very long time. Microsoft needs to do something radical here - like moving into a new ecosystem. Windows 7 will be great on desktops for a very long time, probably longer than XP will be. I think MS is betting a lot of their sales on tablets and ultra-books with touchscreens. Anyone with a desktop who upgrades will be icing on the cake. I also think MS will move to a shorter release schedule, especially because of the yearly releases in the mobile space, and the with the shared kernel of Windows 8 and Windows Phone I could see them releasing yearly updates for both.

The average user no longer wants a desktop. They want portable and ease of use - something windows 8 will be great at. Consumers can buy a tablet for use throughout the day (I can see students using it to take notes), and then when they get home they plug in a mouse and keyboard (maybe a external monitor as well) and now they have a desktop to do schoolwork. For the average consumer, they will have a tablet, laptop (with an attachable keyboard like the surface), and a desktop all in one device! You don't get any easier than that. Always having all the music, pictures and documents with them. That is where the consumer market (and Windows) is headed - converging into one device.

For us power users, we need our desktop. We need computing power for everything we do (along with at least 2 or 3 monitors :) ). For us, the desktop is not going away. If you don't like the new start screen (really the only negative) and you don't foresee getting use to it, then use 7. It'll last you a long time. Some people actually like the new interface on desktops, not necessarily all of Metro, but I do like the start screen. I will probably never use any Metro apps on my desktop, but all of the other improvements make it a worthwhile upgrade for me. I still have my same desktop from 7 and I never used the start menu anyways because I have everything pinned to my taskbar. I think most of the kinks in Metro will be ironed by Windows 9, and will be released much faster than 7->8. Windows will always be coded on the new Windows in development (MS dogfoods all their own software), so we are not going to see any radical changes to the desktop anytime soon.

tl;dr - People don't want to upgrade (not off XP, even more not off 7), so MS is moving to a new market, one which is converging consumer devices. For the average consumer, desktops are on their way out (but Windows will still always have the desktop for power users).