If you love Windows XP, you’ll hate Windows 7 – says Ed Bott on ZDnet. Windows 7: Mojave My Ass –complains Jason Perlow. Dwight Silverman confirms: Sorry, but Windows 7 isn’t a return to Windows XP, while others don’t refrain from some name-calling.
Sorry guys, you’re all wrong.
You’re debating the merits of an operating system based on it’s UI. Sure, if you migrate from XP to Win7, some of the changes can be confusing – but it’s an initial change, the learning curve is not that steep. I actually side with Ed Bott here, the search box to launch programs is a more user-friendly approach than having to remember the names of all *.exe files a’la XP.
But it does not really matter. Mojave my ass? Mojave was a bogus experiment (in fact a PR blitz dressed up as an experiment) showing happy “users” who liked the Vista UI – but hey had no chance to assess what fails in a short demo, and that’s what doomed Vista, not appearances.
Windows in all flavors, be it XP, Vista or 7 is not an application. It’s a friggin’ operating system whose job is to get us into applications and get out of the way. In today’s flurry of blog posts Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has the right approach, presenting performance tests – yes, performance is key to judging how good an operating system is.
The other key criteria is how invisible it stays. Think about it: any time you have to get down to OS level typically means something does not work right. It’s the stupid unexplainable little things like:
- Vista and XP computers not finding each other on a home network until you apply an undocumented patch to the XP machines
- Simple copy or delete operations taking forever
- Not being authorized to move / delete files on my own computer even after elevating to Admin mode, killing UAC and a number of weird cryptic options that take an IT deapartment to deal with, not a home user
- Windows upgrade failing if more than 3GB memory is installed
- The latest Windows upgrade causing printer and camera drivers from several vendors reinstall themselves (some take 30 minutes or more, kinda big deal)
- …
The list could go on, but I think you get my drift: Windows 7 (and any other OS) will be judged on how well computers will run, let users interact with real application without having to touch the OS itself.
Finally, to address the speculation about Windows 7 upgrade paths, let me just reiterate this:
- Win7 should be released as Vista Final (meaning it works)
- It should be provided it as a free upgrade to Vista
- It should come with a letter of apology to all Vista victims
OK, I know we have fat chances for the apology – but I really mean the free upgrade part.
Related posts:
Vista Victims – heh – Sounds like something like Homeland Security should investigate for Federal Disaster Assistance.
On second thought, NO. We’ve got enough problems right now…
You’re absolutely right though, the OS is blurred too often with applications. Like blaming poor fuel economy on bad tires, the argument will only get you so far…
Zoli, I couldn’t disagree more. Windows is very much an application because it’s supposed to be used by end users, not command line Uber Geeks. Many of the complaints I hear and have about it boil down to its application-ness. It can’t get out of your way until Microsoft treats it properly as such.
I am reminded of the one time I was interviewed at Microsoft by Allchin. He says, “I hear you’re a UI guy. What’s the biggest UI problem with Windows?”
My response was configuration of programs. At that time (Win 3.1), you had to run around to a whole bunch of Config files, understand which one had control when, and edit arcane shell syntax to figure it out.
His response? “That’s not part of the Windows UI, your answer doesn’t make sense.”
Boy did he have it wrong! It was a major pain point for almost every user, and hence part of the user experience.
There’s a lot more to the OS than just performance. Sorry, but so long as Windows has a UI, it is an application and should be judged as such.
Best,
BW
Bob,
I think we somewhat agree while disagree:-)
I’m not denying the importance of the UI – if you notice I even side with Ed Bott in the current debate, who finds the Vista style combined Search / Run box an improvement over XP. And talk abut command prompts, the fact that Vista now has a regular cmd prompt and an “elevated” one is utter crap exactly because it’s not done inside the UI in an obvious manner. So yes, user-friendliness matters.
But I do think this whole UI discussion hides the real issue, which is that the OS should work, i.e. let me use OTHER APPS (the ones I turn on the PC for) smoothly, it should not freeze, restart drivers, send users on a wild chase for solutions to mysterious problems (why does Google find better solutions than MS KB articles?). This was the Mojave approach, of course the people in the panel liked Vista, after all it does look better than XP.
People revert to XP because it works with less flaws, despite a poorer UI. First give me an OS that does not prevent me from working, from using my own PC and I will be satisfied; a nicer UI will just be the icing on the cake.