Why do most major new versions redesign their UI?

[+Warwagon MVC]

Have you ever noticed how every new major version of a piece of software always has to have a new redesigned UI (Excluding Chrome and Firefox). For example It seems like every new update to Norton / Norton Internet security always has a new redesigned UI. What was wrong with the old UI? Although hit looks like Norton did damn good up until version 2008 then they started to change / redesign the UI every new version. Or is it software venders way of justifying the new upgrade?

Norton 2000

Norton 2001

Norton 2002

Norton 2003

Norton 2004

Norton 2005

Norton 2006

Norton 2007

Norton 2008

Norton 2009

Norton 2010

Norton 2011

Norton 2012

Norton 2013

[Hardcore Til I Die]

To make it look new.

Why waste time on implementing new features when you can just redesign it :p

[typu]

if you lack content just make it look new...

[Shane Nokes]

It's often to help customers differentiate between versions. A lot of what you're looking at for Norton is just simple graphics changes.

They just change the art assets and call it done. Note...I'm referring to the aesthetics, not the under the hood changes.

[AJerman]

Ugh, Norton.

[Jason S. Global Moderator]

new version, new UI ::shrug::

keeps people thinking that there's something better about it. if you have an appealing UI then people think they need it.

[+Warwagon MVC]

It's often to help customers differentiate between versions. A lot of what you're looking at for Norton is just simple graphics changes.

They just change the art assets and call it done. Note...I'm referring to the aesthetics, not the under the hood changes.

Speaking of which, that's another thing. Norton on their boxes call it Norton 2012, Norton 2013 but when you open the program up and go under "about" to see which version they are using there is never any mention of 2013 or 2010 just version numbers like version 18.0 or 19.0. Sure you could look at the copyright date to get close, but still .. it annoys me!

[Aergan]

Looks like 2012 was a very bad year.

[Shane Nokes]

Speaking of which, that's another thing. Norton on their boxes call it Norton 2012, Norton 2013 but when you open the program up and go under "about" to see which version they are using there is never any mention of 2013 or 2010 just version numbers like version 18.0 or 19.0. Sure you could look at the copyright date to get close, but still .. it annoys me!

That's not really any different from Windows 8 really being NT 6.2 or Windows Phone 7.5 actually being version 7.1.x, or Office 2013 being version 15.

Branded names and actual version numbers often aren't in alignment with each other. :)

[+Warwagon MVC]

That's not really any different from Windows 8 really being NT 6.2 or Windows Phone 7.5 actually being version 7.1.x, or Office 2013 being version 15.

Branded names and actual version numbers often aren't in alignment with each other. :)

In windows you just go into the system proprieties and it will tell you which version. It will say "Windows 8 or Windows 7. It won't just say NT 6.1 or NT 6.2

[Nothing Here]

Have you ever noticed how every new major version of a piece of software always has to have a new redesigned UI (Excluding Chrome and Firefox). For example It seems like every new update to Norton / Norton Internet security always has a new redesigned UI. What was wrong with the old UI? Or is it software venders way of justifying the new upgrade?

~snipped~

You forgot a few. One being this:

[Shane Nokes]

In windows you just go into the system proprieties and it will tell you which version. It will say "Windows 8 or Windows 7. It won't just say NT 6.1 or NT 6.2

Ah I see what you're saying there. In that case doesn't the entry on the start menu/start screen normally list the Branded name with the year on it?

[Guth]

They do that to sell them.

Everyone wants the new sexy, good looking product.

Look at iPhones! Ooooh, its "new" (ie. shiny) must have it. Its the same with software.

Also, to move with the times, like the new version made to look metro-like.

[DudeBro]

Well if UI's didn't change then web browsers would still look like netscape navigator and websites would still look like geocities. Interfaces sometimes do improve each version and at least I notice they try to blend better with the latest OS version. I notice newer apps UI's are trying to look modernui/metro so it looks nice on windows 8. Webdesign also seem to influence things. When web2.0 came around, gradients and rounded corners seemed to be a thing for awhile.

[Mystic Mungis]

I get bored looking at the same UI all the time, as long as it's functional and doesn't detract from the product then I really look forward to new UI's.

[Chasethebase Veteran]

Oh god, seeing pictures of the 2005 one brought back memories! :p

It seems that between 2003/6 it was fairly consistent in that case, and 2011/12 were close to identical.

[Sandor]

In windows you just go into the system proprieties and it will tell you which version. It will say "Windows 8 or Windows 7. It won't just say NT 6.1 or NT 6.2

System in the control panel won't as you mention.

"winver" in the search box will however.

[+LightEco Subscriber²]

Having a new UI gives the consumer that the new version they actually purchased is actually different. It could have all the benefits in the world under the hood, but if nothing the user sees changes, the user won't care and probably will not buy it. Hence, changing even just the colors gives the user the perception that this indeed is a new version.

[remixedcat]

I was a beta tester for Inrix Traffic's new Android version and the UI change from 3.x to 4.0 was immense, but added so much to it and they really listened to thier testers/customers. It's a very good app made a lot better by the UI change and feature set change.

and speaking for windows 8, the look and feel grew on me. I like how solid and professional the new explorer UI is.

[_neutrino Veteran]

generally they change the UI so that people can "See" a difference in the program rather than just having to believe something has been changed.

[Rigby]

[+Eternal Tempest MVC]

Google blends it product with Windows, and you can tell there doing tweaks to blend with Windows 8.

Flipside, how do people still feel about winamp (www.winamp.com) it still actively maintained and updated, but the interface has had no real change for some time.

[Shane Nokes]

Google blends it product with Windows, and you can tell there doing tweaks to blend with Windows 8.

Flipside, how do people still feel about winamp (www.winamp.com) it still actively maintained and updated, but the interface has had no real change for some time.

Winamp used to be one of my favorite players...but I sort of let it fall to the wayside due to the interface not really keeping up or having some decent upgrades.

I can't think of a ton of things specifically...but I would like to see at least a small UI refresh of some kind.

[Dot Matrix]

I'd rather UI changes every version, than none at all. Do you know how horrifying it is to look at new apps that have decades old UIs? Many nerd computing tools suffer this fate (Wireshark, for example), which make them disgusting to run anymore.

[remixedcat]

my current media player UI and it works well with metro.... but this is not the default skin

I made the compilation and the artwork

[Night Prowler]

More people care about the UI then care about the code behind it. It's cheaper to alter the UI and pass it off as a new version, and LOTS do this...