Coffeehouse Thread

94 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

The long road to the Start Screen

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    This is a cross-post for one I made on the Neowin forums.

    I wanted to go over the history behind why Microsoft made the switch to the Start Screen and why I believe the move makes sense. In particular, I would argue that looking at the design history behind Metro, its wrong to consider it as a "tablet-only UI" -- the first steps towards Metro were actually first made in Media Center, which has nothing to do with tablets at all -- and Media Center in itself was the accumulation of a lot of thinking about basic design issues with Windows.

    When Microsoft released Windows 95, it was the culmination of an effort to bring their operating system into a new, modern age -- to bring it on par with the MacOS in terms of user-friendliness, and to bake in a lot of features like OLE automation and context menus that had had already taken off in Windows 3.1. But it was only as soon as it was released, and they had a historic launch touting the ushering in of a new era, that they were facing a new challenge. During the next few years, Microsoft became oriented around tying the Internet into Windows, which brought them into the infamous confrontation with Netscape and anti-trust laws, in what were known as the "browser wars." But the design challenges for Windows during those years were not limited to the issue of making Windows Internet-ready, but to making Windows work in a way that was as easy to understand as the Web. As much as Microsoft had thought they made Windows easier to use, there were still a lot of calls to tech support, stories of "install hell", and complaints from novices that the OS was still too difficult. Apparently, as much as the tech community had embraced the Desktop metaphor and thought it was user-friendly, a lot of novice users still found it confusing. So Microsoft developers were on their feet again, searching for ways to make Windows easier to use.

    Before the release of Windows 95, they'd already been thinking about this, and their first attempt to make a more consumer-friendly interface was released in March of 1995 -- Microsoft Bob, which had almost universally been received as a joke.

    Generic Forum Image

    But the issue remained, and now the Desktop was challenged by a new metaphor, which was a little less patronizing -- the promise of a media-driven, task-oriented Web. Microsoft's experimentation with this began with MSN and something that was known as "Project Blackbird". Blackbird was the code name for a content authoring platform that was meant to be an alternative to HTML, using OLE to create a media-rich environment, with videos, music, images, and other types of multimedia. The design goal was to make the web on par with television in being a consumer-driven content delivery platform. It was also designed to be a front-end on thin client consumer devices, such as WebTV, which Microsoft bought, and which then became known as MSN TV.

    Generic Forum Image

    While Microsoft was making these plans, along came a threat from Netscape, Sun, Oracle, IBM, and later Novell, together referred to as the "Gang of Five." They proposed something that they called the "Internet OS" -- a browser-based OS that would run on a thin client called a "Network Computer" (NC) and would make Windows obsolete. Marc Andreeseen dismissed Windows as a "bag of drivers", claiming that their goal would be to reduce the Desktop OS to a "mundane collection of not entirely debugged device drivers." In response to that, and the furthered growth of the web, Microsoft took a sharp turn away from Blackbird and looked into ways they could both bolster the Windows with web integration and bring the task-oriented nature of Blackbird and MSN onto the Desktop.

    So that went in two directions. The first was a solution to bringing web content to the Desktop; it was an adoption of what was called "push" technology and dubbed "ActiveDesktop". The Desktop would host all sorts of web-enabled widgets that would give the user quick access to the information he wanted.

    Generic Forum Image

    The second direction was Windows Neptune, a prototype for a task-oriented OS that would replace Desktop Windows. Neptune would feature an HTML-based user interface code-named Forms+ and Universal Plug and Play (UPnP). The goal was to have a Windows PC work as easy as any other consumer device on the market. Neptune was organized into what were called "Activity Centers", such as the "Music Center", "Communication Center", and the "Photo Center", and all information was presented in a clear, friendly, easily readable format.

    Generic Forum Image

    Originally, Microsoft planned to bake in the concept of Activity Centers into Windows Me (Millenium Edition).


    Generic Forum ImageGeneric Forum Image
    Generic Forum Image

    They realized the concept still needed a lot more work than allowed by their release schedule, so work on this was differed and their ambitions were scaled back. Some of the ideas from Neptune did end up in the final Windows Me release, which now featured HTML task-based panels, an enhanced Media Player, and a "Help and Support Center."

    Generic Forum Image

    In the mean time, Microsoft continued to pursue strategies for consumer and thin client devices, and this ended up resulting in the idea of the "Media Center" PC, the name clearly influenced from the nomenclature used in Neptune for the various "activity centers." With the release of Windows XP, Windows Media Center was announced, as was a Media Center TV, Pocket PC, Pocket PC-based smart phones, and Portable Media Centers -- portable media players designed around the Media Center interface. The launch screen in Media Center was called the "Start Screen."

    Generic Forum ImageGeneric Forum Image

    Generic Forum Image
    Around this time, Microsoft also started pursuing a tablet strategy as well as the Smart Display -- a device that would work as a monitor when plugged into a PC and as a thin client tablet when picked up and used on the go.

    Generic Forum Image

    Media Center was pitched as a good "10-foot UX", meaning a good user experience for televisions, where the user would be sitting on a couch with a remote, instead of at a desk with a mouse and keyboard. But it was also pitched for the hand held devices such as PMCs, which would be either button-based or touch-based, and for Media Center laptops, which would run Windows XP Media Center Edition, which would be used either with a remote, a stylus, or mouse and keyboard. Eventually, the Media Center interface evolved to become more sleek and text-and-content-oriented, doing away with unnecessary chrome and icons.

    Generic Forum Image

    The Pocket PC moved away from Desktop-mimicking designs that were in the previous Microsoft handheld interface, Windows CE. It had what was called a "Today Screen" -- a task-based design like the one Microsoft was incorporating into Windows, and, like the Start Screen in Media Center, can be seen as a precursor for the Start Screen in Windows 8. It had information on new mail, new calendar appointments, new tasks, and any other information the user might need at a glance. Applications could be launched from the familiar Start Menu.

    Generic Forum Image

    Windows XP, released around this time had "task panes" in Explorer that were influenced by the Neptune prototypes.

    By then, Microsoft was facing a new challenge -- a new, invigorated Apple, one which was more oriented than before around creating consumer devices -- and one which was determined to learn the lessons of all of Microsoft's mistakes. The first slap from Apple was OS X, which was already gaining a reputation for being more consumer-friendly than Windows. It also re-imagined the concept of ActiveDesktop, which as it turned out, was rarely used. In OS X, it was called Dashboard; widgets would appear on a separate screen that could be called up with a hotkey, rather than in how it worked in Windows, which relied on users to minimize all of their open windows or bring the widgets to the front.

    Generic Forum Image

    The second slap was the iPod, a media player device that was more popular and easier to use than PMCs, which were flopping on the market. On top of all of that, Apple was incorporating some search concepts into their next release of OS X that they were developing for the future version of Windows. Losing these battles to Apple would mean letting years of work, planning, and research go down the drain. Microsoft had to act fast, reorganize, and develop a consumer strategy to counter the specter that Apple was raising.

    Dashboard, and as a consequence ActiveDesktop, was re-imagined in the next release of Windows -- Vista -- as the Sidebar. Microsoft didn't want to abandon the metaphors of Windows, and this meant the widgets had to somehow sit next to active windows instead of being represented on a separate screen.

    Generic Forum Image

    Meanwhile, in response to the iPod, Microsoft developed the Zune, which incorporated what was a further developed version of the Media Center interface. Like with Media Center, this wasn't designed for touch either, but button navigation.

    Generic Forum Image

    Microsoft soon discovered that the Sidebar wasn't used that much more often than ActiveDesktop was, so inched more towards the Apple model -- they moved all the widgets to the desktop and allowed users to see them with a "peek" function -- so the Desktop would now act somewhat like the separate screen in Dashboard.

    Generic Forum Image

    Later on, Apple released the iPhone, and Microsoft was struggling in trying to update its Windows Mobile interface to be user-friendly. The first prototype for a remodel was what ended up as Windows Mobile 6.1, and was based on the Media Center design. The tasks on the Today Screen now functioned like widgets, having user interactivity in addition to the information display and the ability to launch the app.

    Generic Forum Image

    To be released in WM 6.5 was the so-called "honeycomb" design, made to be more touch-friendly, where users could select and launch apps easier, and a Zune inspired version of the Today Screen.

    Generic Forum Image

    The Media Center design had also by this time influenced the look of the XBox Dashboard, which used monochrome (though at first, beveled) icons to represent tasks, but otherwise was heavily centered around graphic and text representations, with little chrome.

    Generic Forum Image

    The chrome in the look was eventually reduced even further, and the bevels in the icons were gone.

    Generic Forum Image

    Windows Mobile was still not as nice looking as Zune or Media center, so Microsoft continued to rework the interface, and eventually ended up with the monochrome tile setup you see today in Windows Phone. The "Today Screen" widget interface was merged with the "honeycomb" interface, to be more efficient, the aesthetic of the Zune was adopted, and the design efforts that started that many years back ended up paying off, with the Windows Phone interface being hailed as a success.

    Generic Forum Image


    Microsoft, of course, always planned to port back these changes to the XBox, which are ready for the pending release.

    Generic Forum Image

    And back to the Media Center interface in Windows. Except now, the widgets on the Media Center interface, ported from Windows Phone, had the ability to supersede the widgets on the Desktop, and have them work more like Dashboard in OS X, which had still proven more of a success than Desktop widgets -- it was a separate screen that could be brought up with a hotkey. They also had the ability to run the same apps as you could run on the Windows Phone, making it a good interface for a tablet to compete with Apple's now-released iPad. This also had the ability to revive Microsoft's long-incubated vision of the Smart Display -- a monitor you could use with a keyboard and mouse on the desktop, and as a tablet on-the-go.

    Generic Forum Image

    However, the Start Screen wasn't just a way to cram a touch UI on a desktop device, like some people claim. That was one of its functions. But it also served several other goals. They made the widget system more like Dashboard, renovated the Windows Media Center interface, and made Windows more consumer-friendly and task-oriented, a goal they had since they started working on Neptune and Activity Centers. And as for the touch-friendliness, that goes back to Microsoft's vision for a dual-use device with the Smart Display, not some hair-brained scheme to outwit Apple and save the Desktop environment from the clutches of the iPad.

    So to understand how we ended up at the Start Screen, we need to start at Windows Neptune, Activity Centers, ActiveDesktop -- and for fun, Microsoft Bob.

    Generic Forum Image

    In other words, on the Desktop.

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    IOW, the new start screen brings us all the way back to MS Bob (modern version of course) and all of the limitation there-in (Walls without Windows).

    Great post BTW. I haven't read every little detail but I commend your efforts to bring such clarity to Microsoft's design history.

  • User profile image
    PaoloM

    , DeathByVisualStudio wrote

    IOW, the new start screen brings us all the way back to MS Bob (modern version of course) and all of the limitation there-in (Walls without Windows).

    Great post BTW. I haven't read every little detail but I commend your efforts to bring such clarity to Microsoft's design history.

    Way to ignore everything and rehash your opinions. Who are you, Willard's son? Sad

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , PaoloM wrote

    *snip*

    Way to ignore everything and rehash your opinions. Who are you, Willard's son? Sad

    Sorry I thought I'd not bore you with a blow-by-blow rebuttal of everything brian posted. It's all been said before.

    And since when did " I haven't read every little detail" = "ignore everything". Nice biased point of view...

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    PaoloM

    , DeathByVisualStudio wrote

    *snip*

    Sorry I thought I'd not bore you with a blow-by-blow rebuttal of everything brian posted. It's all been said before.

    And since when did " I haven't read every little detail" = "ignore everything". Nice biased point of view...

    Considering your conclusion ("brings us all the way back to MS Bob (modern version of course) and all of the limitation there-in (Walls without Windows)") it looks pretty obvious that you have not bothered to grasp or even understand the whole point of the post.

    This mean, effectively, that you "ignored everything".

  • User profile image
    aL3891

    @DeathByVisualStudio:

    The start screen is the polar opposite of bob.. The startscreen is about user content and the OS ui getting out of the way of that. Bob was about wrapping everything in a cartoony dumbed down layer of "multi media" 

    Thanks for playing though.

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    @PaoloM: Since you're so smart you must be right. If I many be so bold as to quote you, "here's a cookie".

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , aL3891 wrote

    @DeathByVisualStudio:

    The start screen is the polar opposite of bob.. The startscreen is about user content and the OS ui getting out of the way of that. Bob was about wrapping everything in a cartoony dumbed down layer of "multi media" 

    Thanks for playing though.

    While the shape may be different the constraining nature of the start screen and the rest of the Metro side of W8 is similar to Bob when compared to the flexibility offer by the desktop.

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    aL3891

    @DeathByVisualStudio:

    "The desktop" is still there.. what you should be comparing is the flexibility of the Start menu to the Start screen.

    As for that comparison, the search experience is at worst identical between the two, allthough i personally prefer the win8 way to search apps and not list a bunch of emails from outlook that i'm extremely unlikely to be interested in. i do kinda wish it would display results from settings if there are no results from apps, but oh well, there is a shortcut for searching settings only. You dont get that in the start menu either.

    As for general flexibility and customization, even you cant argue that the start menu is more customizable than the start screen...

     

  • User profile image
    spivonious

    Fantastic post. It's amazing to think that MS was sitting on these ideas ten years ago and just couldn't bring them to market in a way that consumers got excited about. I wonder what would have happened if they had stuck to their guns and let Apple do their own thing. Would we all have media center PCs, Windows Mobile phones, and "smart screen" devices?

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    I would have referenced PointCast, in regards to the development of ActiveDesktop.

    Looking back, Microsoft made some terrible phones. In fact, I've only destroyed one phone in an act of rage, it was an ipaq.

    At least they got their act together.

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    AndyC

    , DeathByVisualStudio wrote

    I haven't read every little detail

    You might make more informed comments if you tried that first.

    It's a very well written article. There are a few things I'd slightly disagree with - there's very little relationship between ActiveDesktop widgets/Gadgets and Start Screen Live Tiles other than the fact the handful of gadgets that exist were generally small notification displays, with the exception of the odd cpu meter/calculator app. And it was rather later into the game when OS X started to gain traction than the article indicates, though the point about dashboard remains valid.

  • User profile image
    OrigamiCar

    @brian.shapiro:"Microsoft's experimentation with this began with MSN and something that was known as "Project Blackbird". Blackbird was the code name for a content authoring platform that was meant to be an alternative to HTML, using OLE to create a media-rich environment, with videos, music, images, and other types of multimedia."

    Fascinating read Brian.

    Interesting fact about Blackbird - Microsoft at the time saw this as being a technology we would all use to create content online at MSN. In fact Visual Interdev (remember that?!) was originally conceived to enable developers to create Blackbird content. It was sort of like classic asp but not designed to be used quite the same way. This was right before Bill Gates had his realization that HTML and the internet were going to be important and so Visual Interdev was switched to asp/html, and IIS (version 2 at the time if memory serves), received addons that allowed it to publish asp sites.

    The reason I know this is right at this time, I was working on an internal ecommerce site for Microsoft and was one of the first people to play with classic asp and Visual Interdev and some of the early pre-alpha builds were VERY rough! Still, it was much nicer than the alternative which was ISAPI stuff using C++. My claim to fame such as it is, is that I worked on the first eCommerce site in asp technology - released just as the first 'Internet Studio' went into Alpha right around the time of the Site Builder Network conferences. Good times!

  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    , OrigamiCar wrote

    Interesting fact about Blackbird - Microsoft at the time saw this as being a technology we would all use to create content online at MSN. In fact Visual Interdev (remember that?!) was originally conceived to enable developers to create Blackbird content. It was sort of like classic asp but not designed to be used quite the same way. This was right before Bill Gates had his realization that HTML and the internet were going to be important and so Visual Interdev was switched to asp/html, and IIS (version 2 at the time if memory serves), received addons that allowed it to publish asp sites.

    And when Blackbird was abandoned in favor of HTML, Microsoft continued to pursue their strategy with ActiveX pages and embedded objects, and then when ActiveX failed, they moved to the .NET strategy. And today, we're on the verge of rich, multimedia Internet-enabled apps running Microsoft's framework, except within the Metro environment instead of on the browser.

    So, there's a whole second thread to this history.

    By the way, I wrote the Wiki page for Blackbird and I wasn't able to find any visual references for Blackbird or Blackbird content in Interdev. If you have any screenshots or any more information to add to that page, please to so.

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , aL3891 wrote

    @DeathByVisualStudio:

    As for general flexibility and customization, even you cant argue that the start menu is more customizable than the start screen...

    I don't disagree with you there. The start menu is much more customizable than the start screen. And when you add gadgets to the mix it's even more powerful.

    , AndyC wrote

    *snip*

    You might make more informed comments if you tried that first.

    My summary is very well informed thank you. Sorry if I didn't give you a full and concise list of things you can apologize for.

    , AndyC wrote

    *snip*

    It's a very well written article.

    I'm glad you agree. You know I did say "Great post BTW." but you probably didn't catch that getting all riled up that I said something negative about Microsoft. 

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    OK children, don't make me lock this thread due to personal insults, when it started off so well.

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    It is nice to see this long road of evolution while the desktop is still the desktop from Win95 (or 3.1) and people still love it. Showing me all those short lived eye candies only makes me wonder how long this new eye candy can last.

    It is sad, because start screen is not an evolution of desktop that people loved. Start screen is the evolution of MS Bob who constantly failed and only finding its place in very specialized casual devices.

    Sorry to be negative about it. But, let's face the fact, Vista added Bob 6.0 when no one cares about it. And then, Win7 comes with desktop 4.0, everyone loves it. And now, they are repeating what Vista did, except, trying to out right downplay desktop. It is not going to end well on traditional PC market.  I definitely love it on my WP7 and Xbox360. I certainly don't want desktop on those two devices. And Metro will definitely do well on Tablet market. It is very clean, interactive, organized, and well designed.

    But, like all other excuses MS said, "use the best tool for your need". I did not see this been applied to Win8.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    , magicalclick wrote

    It is nice to see this long road of evolution while the desktop is still the desktop from Win95 (or 3.1) and people still love it. Showing me all those short lived eye candies only makes me wonder how long this new eye candy can last.

    It is sad, because start screen is not an evolution of desktop that people loved. Start screen is the evolution of MS Bob who constantly failed and only finding its place in very specialized casual devices.

    Sorry to be negative about it. But, let's face the fact, Vista added Bob 6.0 when no one cares about it. And then, Win7 comes with desktop 4.0, everyone loves it. And now, they are repeating what Vista did, except, trying to out right downplay desktop. It is not going to end well on traditional PC market.  I definitely love it on my WP7 and Xbox360. I certainly don't want desktop on those two devices. And Metro will definitely do well on Tablet market. It is very clean, interactive, organized, and well designed.

    But, like all other excuses MS said, "use the best tool for your need". I did not see this been applied to Win8.

    Why do you believe people love the Start Menu so much? And if people don't like gadgets, why do so many download Rainmeter, and even skin it to look like Metro...

    The funny thing is that I see a lot of the same people who complain about Metro also complain that Media Center is being taken out. Metro is bad, but Media Center is good?

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.