Vista UI. Oy... Just Oy.

[Mr. Gumby]

I feel sorry for the vast number of people who only know how to navigate through Windows due to repetition.

Example: back in college we all had Dell laptops with Windows 2000 or XP installed. When I would lend somebody my laptop (exact same model and OS), the vast majority of people simply could not find their way around because I moved the icons/shortcuts on the desktop to a mac-like configuration and moved the start menu/task bar to a different location. If they knew just a little bit about how to use a computer they would not have had any problems.

I'm not trying to bash these people, but pointing out that Aspirin and Tylenol are going to be making a killing as the droves of computer-illiterate are gradually forced into using Vista.

 

[Lixivial]

I tolerate Vista. If the hardware vendors had proper support for it out of the gate, I'd be much happier. As it stands, Windows Explorer crashes thrice daily, and my reliability rating on my work machine stands at 3.5 of 10. ...That's unrelated to the Vista UI, though.

I don't find the transparency getting in the way, but then I've grown through Apple's follies with transparency, too. Thing is, Microsoft gave the user three options: You can disable transparency in Aero Glass while still keeping the rest of the glass effects; you can revert to Aero Basic; you can revert to Classic Windows themes. That's a fair bit more than Apple can say as they forced users to tolerate their misgivings with transparency.

The worst thing about Vista's UI, aside from rearranging the control panel into so many subcategories that it matches Redmond's campus, is the jarring switching in and out of Glass mode. This is jarring, it's unnecessary and it's just plain stupid.

As an end user, I don't like to see my screen drop to black, see a spinning circle for a minute, and then see that my Glass has been removed. Granted it only happens in low-memory situations, or when an incompatible application comes along, but the low-memory makes little sense. Especially when Glass was more efficient than running Windows Classic in betas (I think this may have been fixed, but on average running Classic themes made the processor work harder). And it also takes more processor time, and likely more memory to switch between the themes!

There's also the half-breed compatible apps (such as the Citrix client), those that don't disable Glass but disable the animations of closing, opening, and minimizing windows. Again, nothing earth-defying, but still very inconsistent. It's sad when the user doesn't know what to expect from the UI at a given moment.

There's a difference between philosophical layout design decisions (breaking down the Control Panel, for example) and just plain bad UI. Bad UI can be fixed, but it still doesn't fix the problems with micromanagement of layout and inconsistency. I find it more worrying that Microsoft has a consistently poor design philosophy, and has made no attempts in changing that.

EDIT: Oh, and a fun way I've found to crash Windows and send its head into its own arse is to hold down the Windows key and E until it just tailspins because it's used up all the memory. I don't know if they've fixed it yet, but... uh... yeah.

 

[SSpiro]

Long time Mac user (17 years) and Windows user at work (13 years). Installed Vista as soon as it came out, spent a week with it, and then wiped the drive and went back to XP. The eye-candy was nice for about half-an-hour, became dull, and then reality of Vista set in. I was disappointed because I really was hoping for a Mac-like interface in Vista.

Ironic that I actually felt happy to be back in XP. Oh and Office 2007 -- shudder -- never never never again.

Couldn't agree more, my friend!

 

[solvs]

who cares about title bar has an icon or not? does that make it more difficult for average user to finish the task?

Well... yeah.

 

[fansub]

 

[SSpiro]

That's freaking hilarious!

 

[IJ Reilly]

That's freaking hilarious!

Especially the second time.

So, what are people outside of the Mac-using community saying about Vista? Are they excited? Do they see it as a real improvement in their computer using experience?

 

[SSpiro]

Especially the second time.

So, what are people outside of the Mac-using community saying about Vista? Are they excited? Do they see it as a real improvement in their computer using experience?

They are saying the same thing. I work in IT industry, 98% of my customers are PC users, and every single one of them are either uninstalling Vista, or cancelling their orders.

 

[v-ault]

Especially the second time.

So, what are people outside of the Mac-using community saying about Vista? Are they excited? Do they see it as a real improvement in their computer using experience?

take a look
http://aspnetresources.com/blog/vista_sucks.aspx

 

[BornAgainMac]

I personally hope Microsoft continues with changing Windows & Office 2007 to even make it worst. For example, you have to press Control-Alt-Del after clicking on the Start Menu for it to appear. Next have desktop icons randomly move around while you use your machine, place the close box in the lower right hand side that is only 4 pixels, make Office 2007 hide the save icon by default, report every document you open as a virus by default with no setting to turn it off. Make the activation code 3 times longer and require it be entered for every Windows update and also bi-weekly.

That should help Apple out.

 

[Killyp]

Okay, I didn't like Vista at all when I used it. I did actually honestly approach it with an open mind, I wanted to like it as I know I'm going to be forced to use it. However, after about an hour of playing, I just couldn't stand it. It seemed bland and mashed together. OS X is interesting, colourful and light to look at. Vista is heavy (despite the transparency), cluttered and confusing. I couldn't really tell much from the functionality of it in the period I had to use it. However...

...a friend purchased and installed it on his (pretty recent) Alienware laptop, which isn't exactly slow (AMD64, very meaty graphics card) and it's soooo slow for a fresh Windows install. First thing it did when I booted it up was lock up Explorer. Then, my friend attempted to show off the built in games, loading up Perian something (can't remember the exact name of the game), which comes as a built in Vista game. It was pretty funny, as he'd just splashed out over £200 of his own pocket money on this OS, and it BSODed instantly upon trying to load the game.

Now these glitches will be fixed over time. However, the UI cannot be fixed if Microsoft sticks to their future OS plan. I just had a quick Google, and couldn't find any answers to support this (so I really don't have many grounds to stand on), but I certainly remember hearing from a reliable source (I think it was on the BBCi Freeview news thingy), that Microsoft won't be releasing a major OS revision for another 12 years. When they do, it won't be Windows, it'll be what Vista was meant to be (but never became because XP was getting too old) which is Vienna.

 

[MacGuffin]

I wouldn't touch Vista with a 10-ft. pole.

It's not that the Windows UI is so bad. In fact, as judged by the world running Windows much more widely than OS X, ordinary mortals can figure it out just fine. No, the griping seems mainly to be from overheated aesthetes (you know who you are) who have the time to write 300-word posts about how onerous it is for them to click on a friggin' Windows icon. Poor babies.

No, the real problems with Windows from 3.1 to the present silly incarnation are well-known and much more serious: security, bad underlying design, corporate hostility to the user, platform and product incompatibility, etc.

Again, the real world has figured out the Microsoft UI. And that's where the trouble begins. ;-)

 

[Killyp]

Actually I quite liked Windows 3.1. Very simple and clean idea, not at all overloaded, unlike it's latest cousin.

 

[G5Unit]

http://www.ctrlaltdel-online.com/comics/20070331.jpg

CAD is great at making fun of windows, mac, and linux!

 

[thewhitehart]

I've only played with Vista in stores. The eye candy didn't bother me, but the amount of 'clickable' space in each window did. I don't like the idea of having multiple options all over the place to do the same thing. Like the networking configuration.

I'm the kind of person who likes a 'control center' where every setting has its own icon. Of course, there is the control panel, but just like Windows XP, there are a bunch of 'question' links on the left side of a window asking if you'd like to do this or that, etc., without any consistency with where these questions appear. I'm sure it doesn't bother most people, but I hate that. I actually like being restricted to using one control panel to change a setting.

And just like XP, there's a clutter of third party "Get AOL free for five years" icons in the taskbar. It's just, well, dirty.

I like being OS X's little submissive S&M bi*ch. The interface is clean, simple, and it's direct in telling me where to go when I want to change something. Even though I'm technically competent, I like simple interfaces.

 

[Nightkrawler]

My option on vista is that its too bloated, but i can imagine that if you "work" with it a bit then its alright. Vista has some interesting things, even in terms of security, but i think you can only increase security in an operating system by lowering the code (slimming down things, but thats another chapter...).

There are some things that i like but way more things that i hate. Just look at the control panel with the classic view, its just... crap . And take a look at the running services/Task manager oh nice i really need the "Tablet PC" service running every time on my desktop PC .

"Readyboost" or "Superfetch" are interesting features, but my philosophy is to turn everything unneeded off and use more efficient programs so that there are more free Resources - thus having a nice fast system. "Superfetchs"/Vistas philosophy is to load everything that the user MAY need into the free ram so that it runs faster when the user starts it.
It seems that they only made it that way because without it the system would crawl with that software bloat.

The GUI has some nice points, but i think that for example the developer of the appearance panels really screwed it up. They just took the tabs of the appearance panels of XP and made separate windows for it
Flip-3D - looks nice but in terms of productivity its nothing when you look at exposê (but expose is near useless when you have too many windows open)

Office 2007 - i have to say i kinda like the gui. I worked with office 2000/XP/2003 before long time, but the 2007 GUI seems more logical for me.

There are way too much things that are too simelar too OSX, really had the feeling that Microsoft copied too much (or vice versa, see the longorn alphas)

But the thing that really annoys me is UAC (cancel or allow? ) and that i have a 25% less FPS than in XP at gaming, and - we all know - Windows is mostly used for gaming on intel macs. Not that you are saying "you aren't using vista because you cant play games as fast as in xp?" I think that if the operating system slows down the applications it runs then its a let me say a "not so good" operating system.

I ended up by using OSX as main system and a trimmed down XP just for gaming if needed. For office i have to say i use office 07 in parallels i don't like the feeling of using rosetta

 

[Sesshi]

take a look
http://aspnetresources.com/blog/vista_sucks.aspx

The best I can say is that he doesn't seem qualified to be an MVP.

I have zero problems so far, apart from compatibility issues I'm already aware of. Vista has been (well, so has XP but Vista is much closer or better in some situations than OS X in general functionality) much more stable than OS X... but then, all my Vista machines are new and tested with it... i.e. I'm comparing like for like against OS X.

I don't like the control panel as others have said. Most of the irritating stuff you can turn off, thank god. The hybrid sleep is (on a machine preloaded with Vista) more reliable than the MBP's. I actually use the Sidebar more than Widgets because they're onscreen all the time. Generally speaking what I get is something akin to OS X in terms of eye candy and facilities while being able to run applications that actually matter to me, while not needing to maintain two OS's. Works for me, and that's why I'm even considering dumping my remaining two Macs as they just don't get used anymore.

 

[SMM]

The best I can say is that he doesn't seem qualified to be an MVP.

I have zero problems so far, apart from compatibility issues I'm already aware of. Vista has been (well, so has XP but Vista is much closer or better in some situations than OS X in general functionality) much more stable than OS X... but then, all my Vista machines are new and tested with it... i.e. I'm comparing like for like against OS X.

I don't like the control panel as others have said. Most of the irritating stuff you can turn off, thank god. The hybrid sleep is (on a machine preloaded with Vista) more reliable than the MBP's. I actually use the Sidebar more than Widgets because they're onscreen all the time. Generally speaking what I get is something akin to OS X in terms of eye candy and facilities while being able to run applications that actually matter to me, while not needing to maintain two OS's. Works for me, and that's why I'm even considering dumping my remaining two Macs as they just don't get used anymore.

And you are a well-known MS plant here on the board. You, Clevin and a growing group are just here in support of Redmond. Why don't you just quit it...or is the pay too good?

 

[Sesshi]

And you are a well-known MS plant here on the board. You, Clevin and a growing group are just here in support of Redmond. Why don't you just quit it...or is the pay too good?

My pay is quite good - but it doesn't come from anywhere near Redmond, Round Rock or Cupertino. A very small part of it did come from Tokyo for a time but well... I was never beholden to that company in any case.

Nevertheless, I only say what I experience... not what I assume or what I irrationally believe in. And hey, at least I don't pose as an 'IT Manager'

And I'll probably be here as long as I have Apple kit. And since I'm in the process of buying a bunch of XServes, even without an Apple on my desktop that might be quite a while

 

[APPLENEWBIE]

Having switched about 1.5 years ago from a mess-o XP machines I can say with authority that it has been a great experience to work with Macs. In almost every way.

I must say, however, that XP was not hell. In general, I found XP to be a very usable OS. In some ways, the "my computer" file structure was comforting as I always new were stuff was.

My problem with Windows was it's instability, and vulnerability to viruses, spy ware, corruptions etc, etc. It got to be such a hassle that I hated using my computers. The only time windows felt "right" was after a fresh re-install, which happened way too often, in my experience. I hope for Window's users sake that Vista is vastly improved in those regards.

I don't have much experience (at all) with Vista, having only played on it a some computer stores. It does seem to be "heavy" and overdone, in my opinion. (One of the things I really love about OS X is it does' have a "light" feel to it. It is logical and flexible, mostly.) One thing I do wonder about with Vista is this, for what it's worth: On several Vista machines, brand new ones, I found screensavers to be jerky, with very low frame rates. How big a resource hog is Vista??

 

[IJ Reilly]

I wouldn't touch Vista with a 10-ft. pole.

It's not that the Windows UI is so bad. In fact, as judged by the world running Windows much more widely than OS X, ordinary mortals can figure it out just fine. No, the griping seems mainly to be from overheated aesthetes (you know who you are) who have the time to write 300-word posts about how onerous it is for them to click on a friggin' Windows icon. Poor babies.

No, the real problems with Windows from 3.1 to the present silly incarnation are well-known and much more serious: security, bad underlying design, corporate hostility to the user, platform and product incompatibility, etc.

Again, the real world has figured out the Microsoft UI. And that's where the trouble begins. ;-)

Figured it out, but only up to a point. Most Windows users (and a great many Mac users as well), dig trenches of knowledge through their operating systems. They get pretty good at doing a very limited number of tasks. It's how they do when they dare to venture outside the trench that tells the usability tale, or even more importantly, how often they dare to venture out. I believe the MacOS still does a better job of rewarding the more intrepid user, the person who wants to do and know more than the minimum. None of this really about OS aesthetics, it's about design -- which ain't necessarily the same thing.

BTW, am I the only one who knows what a "MacGuffin" is?

 

[Erasmus]

Well, you have to agree that Vista looks really nice. The blur effect is cool, and the Flip3D is very nice. Although I've never used it, and have only seen it running for a few seconds, it is clear to me that they make things look nice simply so they can stick it in nice looking advertisements. (The guy who made the "Wow" commercials should be shot. Multiple times. In the legs, arms and groin.)

I think at least one of Leopard's new secret features will be a whole lot of new eye candy that will both end up looking better than Vista, and be a lot more functional. I mean, OSX has had nice little sweets for years now, but they don't really get in the way of doing work. I mean, most of the pretty things, such as the Genie effect when minimising a window, are really specifically there so you know what just happened. The water ripple effect on dashboard is a bit of an exception, but who doesn't like that? Transparent menus don't slow you down, and fading menus are OK, seeing as they are gone in a tenth of a second.

 

[djellison]

I've never owned a Mac - I intend to this summer.

I've used 3.11, 95, 98, 98se, 2000 and XP....and, for three days, Vista.

It's like the new BMW M5 - it's like they intentionally made everything as annoying and awkward as possible. It looks shiny, none of the menu stuff is going to make an XP user get lost. It's all useable - takes 5 mintues to find out where it all goes...but the 'security' is just beyond belief.

Run a driver
"Are you sure...ok, give me the password"
open a file
"Are you sure...ok, give me the password"

OK - how do I make this go away. On to google, find it's all about UAC...disable that. But nope - still starts begging for details when I just want to install something.

And when I HAVE installed it - it doesn't work (3ds Max 9, Adobe stuff demanding re-activation all the time, Bitcomet loosing my downloads, Firefox dropping all my settings)

The start menu - oh my god the PAIN. Click the folders to open things is like wading through concrete...ARHGHGHGHGHJUS. 'Quick, we need something like Expose' - so windows-tab it is then...it's crap. It's worse than Alt-tab because you can't actually see what's going on and you can't clik on anything.

If you've got enough ram ( 2gb )then 'readyboost' is a waste of time, total marketting bull. It's just XP, but added gloss, and added annoyance.

I've gone back to XP. I won't be going back to Vista. They have spent BILLIONS on this, and I just can not see where it's gone. What have they actually been doing? There is no Wow to the product. There is a Wow to the price of the product and the development of it....they're both "WTF? Woah" more than 'Wow' though. Vista is the best marketting move that Apple could ever wish for.

Doug

 

[solvs]

Well, you have to agree that Vista looks really nice.

No. The blue is ugly and inconsistent. Flip is worthless because you can't see anything when it's stacked like that. I hope to god Apple doesn't do that, but I'm guessing if they did something like it, it would be better. Maybe even more 3-D like Sun's implementation, but good.

 

[Erasmus]

No. The blue is ugly and inconsistent. Flip is worthless because you can't see anything when it's stacked like that. I hope to god Apple doesn't do that, but I'm guessing if they did something like it, it would be better. Maybe even more 3-D like Sun's implementation, but good.

Meh, to each his own. I think it looks good. Far from practical, but still good looking. Blur is awesome! (Would be surprised if it doesn't end up in Leopard, or something similar. Maybe with a crystallated texture? That would be cool.)