I’ve just seen some visuals (or concepts) of the latest Windows7 design. This look like a copy of Apple’s mixed with navigation systems off the 10yr old SGI 3d apps I used to use… It’s nice to look at for a few minutes, but operationally on a day to day basis? Not so sure – too cluttered any inconsistent.
Also, if we’re completely honest it looks a bit thrown together by a bunch of people from the Web2 ‘bug button’ community. It’s just a bit of a dog’s breakfast. Read what this is below:
Meaning: Dogs Breakfast
An unappealing mixture of many things… a hodgepodge… a
disorganized mess… but probably still usable (or consumable in the
case of food.) From the idea that a dog will eat anything and feeding
it a mixture of whatever is on hand. (Unappealing because only the dog
finds its breakfast appealing… if you see or smell the dog food in
the morning, as you’re feeding the dog, it may well turn your stomach.)
Man oh man! You would think that each new release should achieve three main goals.
1. Add much needed functionality
2. Fix or remove broken functionality
3. Make the operating system easier to use… Here are my initial thoughts on this.
1. Add much NEEDED functionality
There’s a big difference between NEEDS and WANTS (Ask ya parents). Looks like they’ve just said ‘Yes!’ to every feature asked for and added even more anyway. All the extra features and functionality cost the users as I bet this level of GUI and feature set will require a higher hardware cost at the consumer end. ie: “Get Windows7! (but add another gig of ram!)”
2. Fix or remove BROKEN functionality
Hopefully they have fixed the plethora of issues in XP and Vista, but this looks like a full code upgrade? Does that mean we’ll be ‘Beta Testing’ yet another power-hungry MS operating system? Why can’t they ‘Refine’ their systems rather than continually ‘redevelop/redesign’ them? All that does is mean that Microsoft are always on the back foot from a stability perspective.
3. Make the operating system EASIER to use
Firstly, these screens are a work of art to look at, just like a forged Apple/SGI/Rembrandt. Trouble is through that an operating system should not be a ‘Work of Art’ but rather an ‘Operating System’. ie: A system to operate in on a daily basis. A decent OS should be elegant, but take a back seat to the real work being done in other applications.
An OS doesn’t earn you money, Excel, Photoshop, AfterEffects, Coldfusion etc do. The OS should be a platform that your working apps sit on. It should be secondary. This is where Microsoft don’t get it. I don’t want the OS interrupting my daily work.
just want it to work! When I’m on a deadline with a large client project I can just imagine the OS screaming “Look at me! Love me! Look at my widgets and dials!” and I’d say back “Bugger off – I’m working! and you’re just a lowly OS!”
The reality is that nearly all the apps I use daily worked fine back on XP and that was really stable! So Why do we actually need such a major rehash! All it does is make people have to learn a new way of working that will change again the next time Apple turns a corner and MS follow. I know MS want to hang around with the cool crowd (Apple) but they should drag their users around the block with them. We just want a smooth ride.
Anyway. Any system my grandmother couldn’t use is too complex. My grandmother couldn’t use this (and could use XP) so enough said. Throw your comments in the pot below – keen to hear people’s thoughts on these screenshots…
Anyone is welcome to republish this article as free online content, provided that the paragraph below is included in the full form as shown.
About the author:
Julian Stone, CEO – Project Management Software visionary for: ProActiveSoftware.com, ProWorkflow.com & Julian101.com
About The Author:
Julian Stone begin_of_the_skype_highlighting end_of_the_skype_highlighting is the CEO of ProActive Software, developers and creators of the leading web based project management software http://www.proworkflow.com.