5 ms·

It doesn't help that the various Windows dialogues treat '/' differently. Windows really should have just one file open dialogue, etc.

wlesieutre 11y ago
I hate that reimplementing the open dialog is an acceptable practice on Windows. I have one dialog in Acrobat, another one in AutoCAD, another for AGI32, and (I think the standard one) in Chrome. Probably others that I'm forgetting. Each of these has its own special list of "favorites" on the left, so if I want to add a shortcut to a commonly used folder, I find myself doing it in 8 different places. Or in some cases I can't; Acrobat has a sidebar with large icons of Recent Places, Desktop, Libraries, Computer, and Network. If you wanted to add somewhere more useful, you're shit out of luck. Anyone know why this happened? Was there a period around Windows XP where the built in dialog was just godawful and everyone said "Fine I'll make my own" and then they never went away? Compare to OS X where any time someone rolls their own dialogs for system features (especially Open and Print), I immediately assume the developer is an asshole. And for the most part, nobody does it. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is printing from Chrome, and theirs even includes a "Print using system dialog…" button.
- teh_klev 11y ago
  In the olden days the standard was the "Common File Dialog" [0], I think this existed on both Windows 2000 and XP. The CFD evolved over time. Then Windows Vista came along and we were introduced to the "Common Item Dialog" [1] which is now the recommended way to File Open/Save. > Acrobat has a sidebar with large icons of Recent Places, Desktop, Libraries, Computer, and Network. Possibly your version of Acrobat is either older, or Adobe haven't bothered themselves to get with the present and implement the Common Item Dialog, or if they do they're customising it...or even worse it's a subclassed franken-dialogue. But I feel and appreciate your pain. These two (fairly old) blog posts discuss the maddening situation with Windows file dialogues: http://insanecoding.blogspot.co.uk/2007/03/file-dialogs.html http://insanecoding.blogspot.co.uk/2007/03/file-dialogs.html http://insanecoding.blogspot.co.uk/2007/04/file-dialogs-take-2.html http://insanecoding.blogspot.co.uk/2007/04/file-dialogs-take... [0]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms646960%28v=vs.85%29.aspx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396 https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms6... [1]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb776913(v=vs.85).aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb7...
- Bjartr 11y ago
  Personally, I can't stand the file selection dialog that is tiny and makes you expand the file tree one step at a time to find the file you want. Anyone know why that one even exists?
  - wlesieutre 11y ago
    Oh god, I forgot about that one. If I'm remembering right that's also one of the scattered legacy bits of Windows that doesn't support DPI scaling. So not only is it a terrible UI, it's also awkwardly pixelated. Thankfully not one I run into regularly.
- anexprogrammer 11y ago
  It's been one of my many pet hates about Windows since first having to use it regularly, around NT or 2000. Windows isn't even consistent with itself over the look of things bringing elements of previous and future versions of Windows to your desktop. To add to the sibling comments... From MSDN "Windows continues to support the old-style Open dialog box for applications that want to maintain a user-interface consistent with the old-style user-interface" No, no and thrice no. If I'm on Win 7, everything should look Win 7 consistent. Likewise if I'm on 10 it should all look 10, perhaps with necessarily reduced functionality if it's a deprecated call. If I'm running Visual Studio on 7, I don't want all my icons, and GUI to be of 10. No matter how diligently you upgrade, there is always something visually out of step. Even with only MS software. I suspect it was the very late arrival of a Windows Style Guide made a lot of developers get the habit of doing their own thing. Then they'll start faffing around with variations so you can have preview in open. Hell, might as well do our own everything. The rules didn't say you shouldn't. Mac always had a pretty tight, and extensive, Style Guide with apparently thought down to individual pixels; Windows seemed not to care, or not understand when it did care. Around XP Windows started caring more about UX, but probably far too late.
  - wlesieutre 11y ago
    The existence of a thorough HIG is one of the things I love about elementary OS as a Linux distro [1]. They take some of flak for looking very similar to OS X, but other distros have taken plenty of cues from Windows in the name of familiarity. At least it's consistent. https://elementary.io/docs/human-interface-guidelines https://elementary.io/docs/human-interface-guidelines
    - anexprogrammer 11y ago
      That consistency is phenomenally important for the user. I had a quick skim, Elementary talk good sense. It's this apparent trivia that makes the experience. Like can dialogue text be copied, or how a menu opens, and why. Or what shortcut keys to use and when. Or always use the default file open as it'll automatically upgrade visuals and at least some capability when the next OS release comes along. :) Play along and the user will know how to print, open, copy, preview and a hundred other things on the first ever use of your new program leaving them just to learn the unique new thing. I kept my Amiga Guidelines phonebook[1] for years after the machine was effectively dead as the principles and explanations were still sound. The Apple Guidelines[2] were worth owning whether you used a Mac or not, again for the principles, and would often get recommended. I had a copy years before I ever touched a Mac! Life got simpler when they were all online. I don't think it matters where you take cues from, so long as you are internally consistent, and apps carry on that consistency. [1] http://www.amazon.com/AMIGA-User-Interface-Style-Guide/dp/0201577577 http://www.amazon.com/AMIGA-User-Interface-Style-Guide/dp/02... [2] http://www.amazon.com/Macintosh-Human-Interface-Guidelines-Computer/dp/0201622165 http://www.amazon.com/Macintosh-Human-Interface-Guidelines-C...

wlesieutre 11y ago

I hate that reimplementing the open dialog is an acceptable practice on Windows. I have one dialog in Acrobat, another one in AutoCAD, another for AGI32, and (I think the standard one) in Chrome. Probably others that I'm forgetting. Each of these has its own special list of "favorites" on the left, so if I want to add a shortcut to a commonly used folder, I find myself doing it in 8 different places. Or in some cases I can't; Acrobat has a sidebar with large icons of Recent Places, Desktop, Libraries, Computer, and Network. If you wanted to add somewhere more useful, you're shit out of luck. Anyone know why this happened? Was there a period around Windows XP where the built in dialog was just godawful and everyone said "Fine I'll make my own" and then they never went away? Compare to OS X where any time someone rolls their own dialogs for system features (especially Open and Print), I immediately assume the developer is an asshole. And for the most part, nobody does it. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is printing from Chrome, and theirs even includes a "Print using system dialog…" button.

teh_klev 11y ago
In the olden days the standard was the "Common File Dialog" [0], I think this existed on both Windows 2000 and XP. The CFD evolved over time. Then Windows Vista came along and we were introduced to the "Common Item Dialog" [1] which is now the recommended way to File Open/Save. > Acrobat has a sidebar with large icons of Recent Places, Desktop, Libraries, Computer, and Network. Possibly your version of Acrobat is either older, or Adobe haven't bothered themselves to get with the present and implement the Common Item Dialog, or if they do they're customising it...or even worse it's a subclassed franken-dialogue. But I feel and appreciate your pain. These two (fairly old) blog posts discuss the maddening situation with Windows file dialogues: http://insanecoding.blogspot.co.uk/2007/03/file-dialogs.html http://insanecoding.blogspot.co.uk/2007/03/file-dialogs.html http://insanecoding.blogspot.co.uk/2007/04/file-dialogs-take-2.html http://insanecoding.blogspot.co.uk/2007/04/file-dialogs-take... [0]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms646960%28v=vs.85%29.aspx?f=255&MSPPError=-2147217396 https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms6... [1]: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb776913(v=vs.85).aspx https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/bb7...
Bjartr 11y ago
Personally, I can't stand the file selection dialog that is tiny and makes you expand the file tree one step at a time to find the file you want. Anyone know why that one even exists?
- wlesieutre 11y ago
  Oh god, I forgot about that one. If I'm remembering right that's also one of the scattered legacy bits of Windows that doesn't support DPI scaling. So not only is it a terrible UI, it's also awkwardly pixelated. Thankfully not one I run into regularly.
anexprogrammer 11y ago
It's been one of my many pet hates about Windows since first having to use it regularly, around NT or 2000. Windows isn't even consistent with itself over the look of things bringing elements of previous and future versions of Windows to your desktop. To add to the sibling comments... From MSDN "Windows continues to support the old-style Open dialog box for applications that want to maintain a user-interface consistent with the old-style user-interface" No, no and thrice no. If I'm on Win 7, everything should look Win 7 consistent. Likewise if I'm on 10 it should all look 10, perhaps with necessarily reduced functionality if it's a deprecated call. If I'm running Visual Studio on 7, I don't want all my icons, and GUI to be of 10. No matter how diligently you upgrade, there is always something visually out of step. Even with only MS software. I suspect it was the very late arrival of a Windows Style Guide made a lot of developers get the habit of doing their own thing. Then they'll start faffing around with variations so you can have preview in open. Hell, might as well do our own everything. The rules didn't say you shouldn't. Mac always had a pretty tight, and extensive, Style Guide with apparently thought down to individual pixels; Windows seemed not to care, or not understand when it did care. Around XP Windows started caring more about UX, but probably far too late.
- wlesieutre 11y ago
  The existence of a thorough HIG is one of the things I love about elementary OS as a Linux distro [1]. They take some of flak for looking very similar to OS X, but other distros have taken plenty of cues from Windows in the name of familiarity. At least it's consistent. https://elementary.io/docs/human-interface-guidelines https://elementary.io/docs/human-interface-guidelines
  - anexprogrammer 11y ago
    That consistency is phenomenally important for the user. I had a quick skim, Elementary talk good sense. It's this apparent trivia that makes the experience. Like can dialogue text be copied, or how a menu opens, and why. Or what shortcut keys to use and when. Or always use the default file open as it'll automatically upgrade visuals and at least some capability when the next OS release comes along. :) Play along and the user will know how to print, open, copy, preview and a hundred other things on the first ever use of your new program leaving them just to learn the unique new thing. I kept my Amiga Guidelines phonebook[1] for years after the machine was effectively dead as the principles and explanations were still sound. The Apple Guidelines[2] were worth owning whether you used a Mac or not, again for the principles, and would often get recommended. I had a copy years before I ever touched a Mac! Life got simpler when they were all online. I don't think it matters where you take cues from, so long as you are internally consistent, and apps carry on that consistency. [1] http://www.amazon.com/AMIGA-User-Interface-Style-Guide/dp/0201577577 http://www.amazon.com/AMIGA-User-Interface-Style-Guide/dp/02... [2] http://www.amazon.com/Macintosh-Human-Interface-Guidelines-Computer/dp/0201622165 http://www.amazon.com/Macintosh-Human-Interface-Guidelines-C...