Microsoft needs to get there crap together

[hdood]

So you want an example, as long as it's not the one given to you?

I wasn't actually talking to you at all.

I was responding to this post by another member, which was about more than the Ribbon:

Furthermore, Office has always pushed the bounds of the Windows UI paradigm, and most cases pushed it forward. Most Office UI controls become generalized and integrated as common controls inside Windows (customizable toolbars) or .NET UI (office 2003 UI, ribbon) frameworks. Without Office doing this, the Windows UI probably wouldn't be where it is today.

Office 2007 matches a hybrid of the two. For something like Office, you don't make two completely different themes. Office 2010 leans more strongly to Vista/7.

It doesn't need any "themes." That's the whole point.

They have freaking made the ribbon available. It's in Windows 7. What the hell else do you want?

The Office 2010 version isn't in Windows 7 because it's not finished yet.

I'd expect it to actually be used, and not for them to go and update their own Ribbon control to look different from the just released Windows one that Microsoft expects other developers to adopt. The Windows Ribbon actually isn't even the 2007 Ribbon, it's a custom design made to fit the more traditional Windows look (which is deemed crappy and unusable by the Office people).

[Kirkburn]

Well, in general I disagree on principle as Office is just a terrible example of a suite of apps that should be using default controls. It's just not the right kind of application. It's far too big and far too complex.

[hdood]

In general response to that: Office is a terrible, terrible example of a suite of apps that should be using default controls. It's just not the right kind of application. It's far too big and far too complex.

It isn't really, but the actual point is not so much that they have to use Windows controls, it's that they should design their custom controls to look the same. Once upon a time they used to do this, despite the fact that they had a large number of custom controls that are obviously too narrow to be part of Windows.

[Cold Blood]

Well,to begin with, if you really need to give the windows 7 gui a legitimate rating you MUST have some knowledge,skill and tastes. The principles that microsoft uses to rate an interface are completely different from the end user's principles. They have a lot to take into consideration, not just some random user's opinion . And people might cry all they want, and consider themselves artists or interface designers, but that doesn't make them qualified to give the windows gui a real rating because what they consider themselves to be and what they are in reality are two completely different things ;) .

Secondly, you can yell all you want at microsoft but that won't change the fact that they do have extremely qualified people for this. They are floating on a big sack of money after all and can afford to hire qualified people to do what they need.

And finally I'm sick of all the talk about how good osx looks. Osx probably doesn't even have a tenth of the number of code lines that windows has. And it doesn't need to keep backward compatibility with a million applications. It doesn't even have such a complex driver model like windows. It doesn't have as many settings as windows and I can keep going like this all day.

[CuCumber]

Secondly, you can yell all you want at microsoft but that won't change the fact that they do have extremely qualified people for this. They are floating on a big sack of money after all and can afford to hire qualified people to do what they need.

Hah. Even I can do better than their so called professionals. What you think, have they ever bumped into term fit&finish?

Maybe they shouldn't use Microsoft paint when they design and align UI elements. :p If they botch simple things like in that pic, they sure don't deserve to be called professionals.

And finally I'm sick of all the talk about how good osx looks.

Why? Wouldn't you expect MS to create something equally great?

[hdood]

Secondly, you can yell all you want at microsoft but that won't change the fact that they do have extremely qualified people for this. They are floating on a big sack of money after all and can afford to hire qualified people to do what they need.

[Subject Delta]

The combination of dull grey, with bright and obnoxious buttons and scrollbars works beautifully.

Can I say that? Does that work as a sentence?

Yep, but I still disagree with you :p

Have you noticed that the two never match though? Office always deviates from the version of Windows that is current when it's released. Why?

Because Microsoft actually target more than one version of Windows with users, and want to provide users with cutting edge features and appealing visuals?

There really is no conspiracy here, except in your head.

[hdood]

Because Microsoft actually target more than one version of Windows with users, and want to provide users with cutting edge features and appealing visuals?

Shouldn't Windows be providing us with appealing visuals, which would then apply to all software? If the standard Windows status bar is so ugly, then shouldn't that be fixed rather than Office creating their own with a custom appearance? If ugly status bars is the design dictated by Windows, the shouldn't Office respect that? If Office simply followed the design of the OS then it really would target all versions of Windows. As it is, it doesn't target anything. It's just different.

There really is no conspiracy here, except in your head.

No one has suggested that Office doing whatever they want is a conspiracy. I don't know how that made any logical sense in your head.

[Subject Delta]

Shouldn't Windows be providing us with appealing visuals, which would then apply to all software? If the standard Windows status bar is so ugly, then shouldn't that be fixed rather than Office creating their own with a custom appearance? If ugly status bars is the design dictated by Windows, the shouldn't Office respect that? If Office simply followed the design of the OS then it really would target all versions of Windows. As it is, it doesn't target anything. It's just different.

Yeah, Microsoft are going to release major UI updates to older versions of Windows just to make them fit in with however they want office to look :laugh:

Let me say this again, because you seem to be having trouble grasping it:

Microsoft design office to provide consistent behaviour across more than one version of Windows. If they target their design specifically at one version, it will provide inconsistent behaviour in other versions.

And different... Hell yeah, of course it's going to be somewhat different, the office applications are significantly more complicated than anything included with Windows so designing them within the constraints of the Windows UI and keeping their behaviour consistent was always going to be somewhat tricky, I really don't think they have done as badly as you seem to think though.

[hdood]

Yeah, Microsoft are going to release major UI updates to older versions of Windows just to make them fit in with however they want office to look :laugh:

Let me say this again, because you seem to be having trouble grasping it:

Microsoft design office to provide consistent behaviour across more than one version of Windows. If they target their design specifically at one version, it will provide inconsistent behaviour in other versions.

And different... Hell yeah, of course it's going to be somewhat different, the office applications are significantly more complicated than anything included with Windows so designing them within the constraints of the Windows UI and keeping their behaviour consistent was always going to be somewhat tricky, I really don't think they have done as badly as you seem to think though.

You are WILDLY exaggerating Office's complexity. I'm sorry dude, but a god damn status bar in Office is no more complicated than a status bar in Notepad. It's the same damn thing. How you can even explain visual differences with "increased complexity" boggles the mind. The only reason it looks different in Office is because Microsoft wanted it to look fancier rather than respect the OS style (which is provided by the OS, and that is how you make the program consistent across several OS versions. Microsoft could decide to make buttons purple in a future Windows version, then all programs that used the standard button control or read the style/color scheme would now look purple whereas if you ran it on 7, they would look gray and blue.)

[Scorbing]

Windows 7 is great, I love it. No problems even in Beta but seriously they need a decent looking GUI and there is so many good people who make themes, like Capricorn and some other dude i dont know but like seriously microsoft needs a good GUI, glass is nice but its just overpowering in my opinion, even i could come up with someone so cliche, not to mention its been around FOREVER the glass idea is terrible. Many people who even get a "Mac" like the way it looks which entices people to buy it cause it looks great.. I know looks are not everything but really though it is, it's what sells. I see so many people with Mac's that just sit there and do nothing with it except type and browse. If they made a better looking OS, i can guarantee sales would go up even more. people don't go PC because it's never even rivaled Mac OS x's design.

Thank you for reading my drunken non sense.

And what exactly is wrong with the current Windows GUI?

Do you prefer this over Windows 7's GUI?:

[Subject Delta]

You are WILDLY exaggerating Office's complexity. I'm sorry dude, but a god damn status bar in Office is no more complicated than a status bar in Notepad. It's the same damn thing. How you can even explain visual differences with "increased complexity" boggles the mind. The only reason it looks different in Office is because Microsoft wanted it to look fancier rather than respect the OS style (which is provided by the OS, and that is how you make the program consistent across several OS versions. Microsoft could decide to make buttons purple in a future Windows version, then all programs that used the standard button control or read the style/color scheme would now look purple whereas if you ran it on 7, they would look gray and blue.)

I am not going to waste my time debating this with you further, as going by your previous posts, I probably have more chance of getting the pope to turn gay than of you ever admitting you could be wrong about something, however I will continue to disagree with you until you can actually provide me with more proof than "I think it looks more blingy therefore it must be so"

[hdood]

I am not going to waste my time debating this with you further, as going by your previous posts, I probably have more chance of getting the pope to turn gay than of you ever admitting you could be wrong about something, however I will continue to disagree with you until you can actually provide me with more proof than "I think it looks more blingy therefore it must be so"

Thanks for telling me how the fancy look of the Office status bar serves ANY purpose other than to make Office look more blingy than programs that use a standard one. The reason you're "not going to waste your time" is obvious, it's because you can't.

[zagor]

And what exactly is wrong with the current Windows GUI?

Do you prefer this over Windows 7's GUI?:

Most people who complain about the GUI don't really know what they are really looking from a GUI.

[hdood]

Most people who complain about the GUI don't really know what they are really looking from a GUI.

Probably this design gem from Windows 7:

Clearly the work of competent professionals.

[toadeater]

Secondly, you can yell all you want at microsoft but that won't change the fact that they do have extremely qualified people for this. They are floating on a big sack of money after all and can afford to hire qualified people to do what they need.

No matter how good the artists, MS management will screw it up in the end. Instead of Watercolor, we got XP. Instead of Longhorn we got Vista/7. The original GUI ideas were by the artists, the final result is what happens once it goes to MS management and noob focus groups. The noobs are the ones who say "I can't tell which one is the close button, you have to make it bigger and in brighter colors." Then management says "It needs more gradients!" I'm pretty sure "Bruce Dickinson" is in charge of MS' GUI design:

P.S. And why the hell is everything cyan!?

[zagor]

Probably this design gem from Windows 7:

Clearly the work of competent professionals.

I don't see that artifact on my computer. It renders without those vertical lines. So, seems it is an isolated issue with your computer....

They are competent enough to work at a big company.

What are you competent at? whining?

[toadeater]

I don't see that artifact on my computer. It renders without those vertical lines. So, seems it is an isolated issue with your computer....

They are competent enough to work at a big company.

What are you competent at? whining?

Who cares what it says on their resume? The results speak for themselves.

But like I said, it's not the artists. It's the design process itself at MS that results in this mediocrity. Not to mention the bugs.

[hdood]

I don't see that artifact on my computer. It renders without those vertical lines. So, seems it is an isolated issue with your computer....

The only thing you found wrong with that screenshot was the artifacts (which are caused by poor programming by Microsoft, and not my computer)? Seriously?

They are competent enough to work at a big company.

What are you competent at? whining?

Oh yes, that personal attacks proves that it's a fabulous piece of work. Let's make more excuses for Microsoft!

[zagor]

Oh yes, that personal attacks proves that it's a fabulous piece of work. Let's make more excuses for Microsoft!

It is good enough for the GUI. No one is looking for a piece of artwork from the GUI!

And, stop generalizing an artifact that you got on your system to the whole windows 7 GUI.

All the posts that you made in this thread just proves you have 0 idea about what you are talking about.

[hdood]

It is good enough for the GUI. No one is looking for a piece of artwork from the GUI!

Are you a Microsoft manager?

And, stop generalizing an artifact that you got on your system to the whole windows 7 GUI.

No one was talking about the artificacts, although that is a reproducible problem caused by crappy programming. You're right though, it's clearly completely rational that the world's largest software company couldn't even afford to have a few interns spend a few days fixing and cleaning up a Windows 7 component. Even suggesting something like that is madness.

[zagor]

Are you a Microsoft manager?

Your shot at asking a ridiculous and meaningless question is a success...

[CuCumber]

It is good enough for the GUI. No one is looking for a piece of artwork from the GUI!

Oh, so first you pay for a product and then defend it's crappiness. As I'm sure you wouldn't notice quality even if it'd hit you, I'll give you some examples:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c..._screenshot.png

http://jonasraskdesign.com/iconarchive/iconarchive.html

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_dhwP9ht4gfE/StkNH0Sv...ion_prev512.png

Ever seen something like that in Windows?

[zagor]

Oh, so first you pay for a product and then defend it's crappiness. As I'm sure you wouldn't notice quality even if it'd hit you, I'll give you some examples:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c..._screenshot.png

http://jonasraskdesign.com/iconarchive/iconarchive.html

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_dhwP9ht4gfE/StkNH0Sv...ion_prev512.png

Ever seen something like that in Windows?

It is you who thinks it is crappy. Nothing turns into crap magically because someone says it is crap. I obviously don't share the same opinion. I paid for it because I think it is a good product.

[markwolfe Veteran]

Probably this design gem from Windows 7:

<snipped to reproduce with comments>

Clearly the work of competent professionals.

Let me chime in, as a Linux user. Such hideous examples are trashed by Windows fans. I am quite surprised to see it defended here.

• Ok, I accept the glass window decorations as the theme for the window, and that exists outside of the application.
  
• The menu uses black text on a light blue gradient. Ok, so far.
  
• Now, suddenly a dark blue gradient is stuffed in there, and the darkness requires a change in text color.
  
• Then there is a large flat gray section. The "to" button and the drop-downs have a gray gradient. Not a light blue? Just gray for whatever reason.
  
• Ah, the light blue is back! But wait! The font name pull down is flat, without any gradient. The font size has one though, and it is gray. And now we have the buttons drawn with a medium blue?!?!
  
• Flat gray for the body, and the bottom status bar area. I guess the flat gray is used to match the middle area?
  

If that were shown as an example of a Linux theme, people would shake their heads and point out how inconsistent the Linux UI can be.