Quality Software Design | The Coffeehouse

phunky_avocado
Dude! It's the (grilled) cheese.

There is a nice review of Delicious Library over at Ars Technica which hilights what good software design is all about. Microsoft and developers of Windows software could learn a thing or two.

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

where?

phunky_avocado
Dude! It's the (grilled) cheese.

I guess the insert link thingamabob does not work.

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/apps/delicious-library.ars

Minh wrote:
where?

Charles
Welcome Change

It does work. The link is in your initial post...

Charles

GeoffC
Picture of a retired stiff

Phunky - thanks for that pointer. I went and read the review and agree with you that there is much that software developers and designers for the Windows platform could learn from Delicious Library.

However, I then went on to read the discussion about the review and began to despair. There seemed to be so much negativity from the Windows camp. I really did get the feeling that they were sticking their fingers in their collective ears and going "La, la, la, I can't hear you"... Truly extraordinary.

I want something like Delicious Library for the Windows Platform, but with attitudes such as the ones I found in the Discussion, I doubt that I'm going to see it for a very long time...

Rossj

GeoffC wrote:
I want something like Delicious Library for the Windows Platform, but with attitudes such as the ones I found in the Discussion, I doubt that I'm going to see it for a very long time...

Its frustrating because I doubt its really *that* hard to do. The main point of the whole article was essentially attention to detail ( and of course plenty of eye candy ) which should be possible on Windows as much as it is possible on OSX.

phunky_avocado
Dude! It's the (grilled) cheese.

Minh: What are you talking about? What book? I read the web article if that is what you mean. Did you? Why would I post a review if I had not read it?

If I must point out the obvious: as another poster already pointed out, it is the attention to detail; attention to detail to the point of making the installation experience pleasant. It is the idea of making the whole package, the whole user experience, from start to end, no matter how "un-sexy" (e.g., installation) it might be, of the finest quality. The reality is that "eye-candy" is important to many (most?) users of our software; people purchase things based on appearance (as opposed to functionality) all the time. As yet another poster pointed out, the reaction by the Windows users on that site were akin to "out of sight, out of mind; I'm not listening...". Hence, there must be something to it.

In many ways the software applications that users use are like ambassadors for the brand in question (e.g., Apple, Windows, Linux, whatever). That is why, I think, Apple has always put such stringent requirements on third-party applications that run on the Apple OS. I don't think Microsoft does so to nearly the same extent. As I think Windows is a nice platform, I'd like to see standards for higher quality software (and even hardware for that matter).

I hoped that this review might stimulate some discussion and bait some of the Microsoft folks to participate.

One can only hope.

Minh wrote:
phunky_avocado wrote:There is a nice review of Delicious Library over at Ars Technica which hilights what good software design is all about. Microsoft and developers of Windows software could learn a thing or two.

So, did you read the book? If not, how do you know their ideas about software design are good? And developers of Windows software could learn a thing or two?

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

phunky_avocado wrote:
Minh: What are you talking about? What book? I read the web article if that is what you mean. Did you? Why would I post a review if I had not read it?

I humbly say "mea culpa, mea culpa". I didn't have to read the article. All I needed to see was "Windows Developer", "Mac", "Design Guide", "$39.95" and KNEW that it was an article about how great Mac UI was compared to Windows. I put 2 & 2 together & got 5. I did what I accused you of doing. The fact is I'm a windows developer that is very frustrated at the state of UI these days, especially how everything is web-centric anymore. And maybe the realization that, damn it, Mac UI is just better than Windows.

Anyway, I apologize -- and on my way back to my hole.

Minh
WOOH! WOOH!

phunky_avocado wrote:
There is a nice review of Delicious Library over at Ars Technica which hilights what good software design is all about. Microsoft and developers of Windows software could learn a thing or two.

So, did you read the book? If not, how do you know their ideas about software design are good? And developers of Windows software could learn a thing or two?

EDIT: I fully withraw the above statement.

phunky_avocado
Dude! It's the (grilled) cheese.

No problem; accepted. Windows UI is one of my pet peeves too and that's why I wanted to try and start a discussion.

Minh wrote:
phunky_avocado wrote:Minh: What are you talking about? What book? I read the web article if that is what you mean. Did you? Why would I post a review if I had not read it?

I humbly say "mea culpa, mea culpa". I didn't have to read the article. All I needed to see was "Windows Developer", "Mac", "Design Guide", "$39.95" and KNEW that it was an article about how great Mac UI was compared to Windows. I put 2 & 2 together & got 5. I did what I accused you of doing. The fact is I'm a windows developer that is very frustrated at the state of UI these days, especially how everything is web-centric anymore. And maybe the realization that, damn it, Mac UI is just better than Windows.

Anyway, I apologize -- and on my way back to my hole.

Cider
Daze-d & Confused

phunky_avocado wrote:
It is the idea of making the whole package, the whole user experience, from start to end, no matter how "un-sexy" (e.g., installation) it might be, of the finest quality. The reality is that "eye-candy" is important to many (most?) users of our software; people purchase things based on appearance (as opposed to functionality) all the time.

I think there is a difficult balancing act though.

Yes, its good if you can insert a level of "sexiness" into an interface, as long as it doesn't get in the way. Two applications which I have found bad in this area were iTunes (especially) and Picasa, both of which seemed so determined to be "eye candy" that they got in the way of you doing what you want.

I think the other major thing I would bring up is highlighted by that installation screen. A bitmap telling the user to drag the files to the Application folder. Doesn't it look lovely? OK, but an accessibility nightmare for people with impaired vision, motor disabilities, etc. As are applications with over-heavy dependancies on Eye Candy. Function has to come over Eye Candy here. Always.

jamie

hi cider... gotta disagree to some extent..

Picasa was really good - UI wise

let me explain:

1. picaso's gray bars and shadows updated the win95/98/2000 gray look MS turned into the blue rubber look ( which i like) - so to me picasa looks more like all Windows except xp - if they were updated

2. i think the UI should stick to technical colours - as picasa does ( grays/silvers/whites)

3. the interface is VERY simple - friends I download it for LOVE it - and i mean LOVE it

4. it gets on my nerves only from a programming perspective - inseccantly updating ( cant figure out how to turn it off) timeline ( excellent design) bombs video on some friends machines

jamie

really it would be cool if MS just beat Apple ( again) at their own game ( again )

Apple: we think the UI should be representative of chrome devices you already own and have - or plastic based devices. Here is our design - Brushed metal and day glo plastic. LIKE IT OR LUMP IT!

Microsoft: OK - the first part makes sence (apple) but the one option for metal or plastic sucks BAD!
We will make 10 sets of different chrome, metal, black rubber, laytex, and plastic - AND let you tune the colous with a slider ( like winmedia)