Kam Vedbrat - Looking at Windows Vista's user interface (AERO) | scobleizer

Nitz Walsh

bluvg wrote:

- Transparencies--neat looking, but I'm very concerned about the title bars being translucent. When you layer several over the top of each other, it looks cluttered, not clear. The title bar shows useful information, so for clarity, I would think this should be clear information. Perhaps make the text non-translucent?

Forgot to mention this and I agree as well, when you get more than 2 overlaid it just looks like a smeared mess. I assumed when this aspect of the GUI was first introduced it was meant to demonstrate the pixel shaders in effect, not to actually be used in the final. The effect is nice, but it quickly goes overboard.

Speaking of pixel shaders btw, that's another component of Aero that was hyped and seems to have gone missing - where are they being used? From early on, we were told about the tiers of the GUI and how it would scale its effects from DX7 performing basic GPU composition of windows (basically what OSX does now) to DX9, which would be demanding but would make us wet ourselves with this "Hollywood interface" it would provide. Ummm....?

There's nothing I've seen so far which couldn't be done with DX7, save likely for the refraction effect of the glass which really isn't that appealing in its current incarnation. Heck, Nvidia's XP drivers allow you to turn the windows and taskbar transparent, and in doing so enable double-buffering on all windows, eliminating the tearing (albiet at a speed hit when you have many windows overlaid). Combine that with the Royale theme, and in many aspects I'd say XP could actually look better without third party add-ons.

I guess we're asking - Where's the Beef? At this point though, I'd settle for some tofu. Smiley

bluvg

I was just thinking about what Nitz said about the Office 12 team throwing the old GUI into the wind, and although I think we're talking apples and oranges relative to Vista, I think that is a good point. Though I'm concerned about how Office 12 is going to handle some customized toolbars where I work, I think the overall change will be worth it. Clearly, as they described the evolution of the product, it was necessary for the UI model to change.

Applying this to Vista, I'll just throw this out there as well. I recognize the need for some semblance of familiarity for a variety of reasons--and I'm an IT admin, so things like consistency of Start Menu and Desktop shortcuts for scripting and whatnot make life easier... of course, we're already used to dealing with different file locations and UI metaphors in each Windows version, so why should this be any different? But consider this--I get asked by our company's execs about things like OS X all the time. These are pragmatic folks, so usually they aren't considering a switch at the office, but they DO consider it for home use (luckily it works well with our remote access solution!). One of the biggest reasons is the interface--not only the surface appearance, but the consistency, the design aesthetics and metaphors, the font handling (though they may not realize exactly what it is), the simplicity, etc. I'm not a big Mac fan personally, but there does seem to be quite a bit of consensus that the OS X GUI is superior (overall) to that of XP. I guess I was really hoping for the surprise GUI introduction/innovation that would really challenge the notion that the Mac has a monopoly on great GUI design and aesthetics--and, judging by the people that sign the checks, they would be excited about this as well (they aren't as resistant to change as some might think... well, as long as it doesn't look like a circus!). Personally, I think functionality-wise, the XP UI has the edge over the OS X UI, and with Vista, the framework is there for very powerful, very useful UI/UX innovations. However, providing the framework alone is like preparing a huge buffet but not inviting yourself to eat, leaving the food untouched and sending guests pictures of what a great buffet could look like. I think Microsoft has a huge opportunity here--perhaps even an obligation--to set the bar high from the outset, driving innovation in UI/UX, rather than simply housing the party and asking others to come in, dance, and make it a memorable event.

I don't mean for this to become a "my OS can beat up your OS" debate, but that is inevitably going to happen after (and before and during) Vista's release. For better or worse, the tech media will go on at length in comparing the two, and this coverage generates interest--usually at the expense of Windows--even amongst exec types. What I'm trying to say is... the concern to look similar to old Windows versions is probably not as important as one might think. If the people that sign the checks would consider switching primarily because of the interface, I think there is almost an expectation that Microsoft will come back at some point with both guns blazing, taking interface design to the next level. And, for the companies that are very resistant to change (they probably won't be moving up to Vista anyhow... not until their storage room supply of dumb terminals runs out... Wink ), they can always put up a lower-tier experience (or perhaps there could be "Business" and "Consumer" themes?).

(This all said... I hope this doesn't come across as a rant against the Aero team, who have obviously put in a great deal of nice work (Yes, Flip3D looks very cool, and is truly useful! Nice job!!). I'm just hoping that they won't use that all of that awesome fire--the INFERNO, in fact--in Vista simply to warm themselves.... Smiley )

Nitz Walsh

bluvg wrote:

However, providing the framework alone is like preparing a huge buffet but not inviting yourself to eat, leaving the food untouched and sending guests pictures of what a great buffet could look like. I think Microsoft has a huge opportunity here--perhaps even an obligation--to set the bar high from the outset, driving innovation in UI/UX, rather than simply housing the party and asking others to come in, dance, and make it a memorable event.

Great analogy.

You know how "eating your own dogfood" is the new buzzterm floating around these days? Makese sense - who better to give you honest feedback about your beta product than the employees you're forcing to use it every day? Smiley

While not completely applicable, I can see this philosophy being applied to design. Do you want your developers to create gorgeous apps that immediately draw peoples attention? Of course, hence the Avalon/WPF framework. Well, why not be your own best example? Create an OS that makes people stop and say..."Wow - what's that?" without waiting for a third party to develop an app which really shows of the abilities of the graphics subsytem. Every single Vista user will have to interact with Explorer at some point, why not make it an eye-opening experience in itself? Want to keep your branding? They make an interface that's so attractive users won't want to skin it in the first place.

Applications on OSX seem to generally have a higher degree of thought put into interface consistency and overall appearance, and there are a number of reasons for this (community of artists, Interface Builder, strict guidelines from Apple) - but I think one of the reasons is that developers have an easy target to hit - Apple themselves. Apple doesn't generally cut corners with their interfaces (again, I'm focusing on aesthetics here), which encourages their developers to place the same amount of attention with theirs.

MS can create attractive GUI's when they really want to. While there's criticism of WMP10's interface in terms of accessibility and functionality, most seem to agree that it at least looks good, with smooth lines, rounded corners and a nice depth to the main icons. MSN explorer is attractive as well. Basically, polish. There's no reason not to apply that same attention to detail to the rest of the OS.

Sites like this:

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/design/mission.html

Give me hope though that MS is at least really taking the style issue seriously. Here's an idea: How about a contest to see who can design the most attractive Aero mock-ups? Set the guidelines for what must be followed with regards to widget placement and overall functionality, but from there the sky's the limit. Winner gets a cash prize and are credited with their submission when Vista ships.

Just throwin' in out there. Don't look at me though, I know what I like but that doesn't mean I can create it. Smiley

buggy123

I thought it was a good video, I like most of the concepts he was displaying, right up until the end. I think they have their priorities for themes/skinning completely backwards. Allowing developers to alter the look of standard controls to defy the standards set by the rest of the interface is a tremendous mistake. "Triangular shaped buttons, star shaped buttons, 3D buttons..." That's NOT great! The only thing that will do is confuse users, as consistency is thrown out the window with Microsoft's blessing and support. One of the things I hate about XP is seeing applications sporting non-standard interfaces. Yes, most of them are hideous, but even the attractive ones look bad because they don't fit in with the rest of the UI.

I've seen plenty of Windows 2000 users at work that change system fonts and colors to suit their own preferences, and it sounds like Vista will be as limited as Windows XP in this regard. Especially considering the vector based interface, Vista should have the most customizable UI of any Windows to date. Please don't make the same mistake; allow us to force standard UI elements on custom designed applications! Allow us to change colors, fonts, themes, whatever we want! Branding be damned, we already know we're using Windows for Pete's sake!

camsoft

Was I the only person disapointed with that video?

I am really not that impressed with the current Vista UI in 5219 its ok but not amazing. I was really hopping for something more. This has nothing on MacOS X. I cant believe this is all they have, I agree that the foundations they have put in are amazing but to then not use the to best effect is just crazy.

The taskbar is so dated. Surely they could of found a better was of updaing this. I requested that they should allow the moving of task bar tiles to re-arange them, but they said they would not implment this, why not? Such a simple feature.

I think Microsoft need to hire some proper UI developers.
The current UI is a complete mess, I also kept telling myself that they were holding the UI back and that the glass was just a prototype and that beta 2 would show the new full blow UI, but now it looks like what we have seen is what we're going to get.

I really wish Microsoft would not show off amazing prototype UI mockups that look increadable and then not deliver. Some of the early teaser movies/shots at PDC 2003 showed the UI looking fantastic.

Sad

:(

Also to keep on moaning, that Alt-Tab feature (Flip) looks nice but is slower to use then the old Windows Alt-Tab.

The Flip 3D feature looks crap, they are some visual glitches when using it. Also requires alot more clicks to select a window. How is this useful. Expose on Tiger is far better.

What on earth has happened the start menu, its huge!
It's got so many icons now, it crazy. Simple is better.

One last thing, you should be able to manage windows by 3d, I want to be able to shift windows out of the way so that they scale to thumbnais size and maybe tilt like in Flip 3d, the kind of things that Project Looking Glass does.

OK, thats all my complaints.
I really have to appluad Microsoft they have done a great job on the Composition Engine and Avalon etc. but the shell does not impress me.

I am praying that there is more to come.

Nitz Walsh

camsoft wrote:

Was I the only person disapointed with that video?

Uh...have you read this thread? Smiley

camsoft wrote:

The Flip 3D feature looks crap, they are some visual glitches when using it. Also requires alot more clicks to select a window. How is this useful. Expose on Tiger is far better.

I'm afraid I don't "get" flip either - it seems to be basically alt-tab, just "looks cool". Expose has a purpose, that is to show you in one shot all your windows and just have you click on the one you want with a visual identification.

Yes, if you have 10 open Word documents using the same font visual ident sometimes isn't enough, but IME it's a rare scenario that I can't identify an app in Expose quickly. Flip3D doesn't allow this, you'll spend time flipping through them to find the one you want instead of just pointing and clicking - really, what's the point?

camsoft wrote:

OK, thats all my complaints.
I really have to appluad Microsoft they have done a great job on the Composition Engine and Avalon etc. but the shell does not impress me.

I am praying that there is more to come.

Seconded - the underlying engine looks impressive no doubt, the concern is actually seeing it in the shell.

Anyone from MS on the Aero team wish to comment?

rjtd

What a disapointment.

I was hoping for a totally different Aero UI by the time of beta2 or rc1, because I totally hate this vista one The colors, the lack os consistency (for example, going from a translucent window to a black one, when app is resized) and the lack of the Wow effect.

Way to go Microsoft. You get some fire, and, like the cavern guy, used it to make smoke throwing it water.

What a disapointment. Vista is now on my "forget about it" pile.

smacfarl

Have to agree with many posters here.

The window manager now draws using DX - great! Mission Accomplished. However now that you have unlimited abilities why not use them? While Avalon seems to have solved the 2D graphics issues as per development and desiagn, many 3D usage questions are largely unresolved.

Flipping windows and glass like transparency are yesterday's news. Vista would appear to have the engine of a Ferrari and the body of a Toyota Camry.

And what's the deal with lack of skinning? Ok so grandma won't want skins, so why deny the ability to everyone? Even with skinning ability built in, is it built in in such a way that grandma is forced to use it? The uniformity of windows IS NOT THE SELLING POINT. I must have watched 10 videos today and ironically the thing most developers got most excited about was the revamping of the bundled games. Why is the creativity of Microsoft employees so stifled that they only feel comfrotable experimenting with the "unimportant" areas of Windows? Are people going to switch to OS X in droves because the Windows UI is "too 3D", that somehow there are too many skinable options and that they would therfore feel a need to use OS X to get a sense of conformity in their work? What kind of BS arguments are these?

How ironic-when Kam is asked for something to show off about the new window manager, he has almost nothing to talk about and then says "This is super secret PDC bits- I'll show you THE NEW SOLITARE?" Hello? Solitare? That's the best the Windows Team can do? Oh and Minesweeper. Yeah that's some 21st century lipstick for the 1990's pig, alright. When I tune into the NBA Championships I want to see Micheal Jordon play. What group of people at Microsoft hires 500+ Micheal Jordon's and then tells them they can't dunk and dribble, all they can do is pass and shoot from the outside because 400 million people in the audience might get too excited? Common people this is making me sad.

rhm

Just think, all those millions of transistors on the graphics accelerator banging away just for alpha blended window frames and thumbnail window previews. I pity this planet.

All the work the original windows architects did to make windows as efficient as possible - the whole thing with the Paint event so we don't have to keep a full resolution copy of every window's contents in memory at the same time. Yeh, I guess we're not running on 16Mhz 386s any more, still, I saw all this stuff in Mac OS X and then it baffled me why people would use so much power to do something so pointless.