6 ms·

>If we look at our tools from back then, we would find them savage I don’t know how true that is... you have tools today with the UX of then (vim, web 1.0 webs

by setr 8y ago

>If we look at our tools from back then, we would find them savage I don’t know how true that is... you have tools today with the UX of then (vim, web 1.0 websites) and they’re both functional, useful, and not really that different from their modern equivalent. Software-wise, its hard to say that much has changed. The main difference is uaage between early web and modern is web-apps (not significantly different from desktop apps) and the amount of sheer content to be found. Perhaps the centralized usage of social media too, but their usage is probably unsurprising (more surprising is how much personal info people feel fine giving away) Hardware has become radicaly different, but somewhat in an expected way: everything got more dense. The only major shift in thinking there might be touchscreens, and google/gps available anytime anywhere, but neither are particularly surprising. After GUIs became a major thing, I would argue most of our UX went stagnant. You could pull out a 1994 pc today and have no issue using it, and someone from 1994 would likeky have little trouble with windows 10, or even an iphone (after getting past the touchscreen). Things got faster and smaller, but not different. Certainly not the difference of something actually “savage” (like a stone tied to a stick) to something truly “modern” (like a powerdrill), that would require a totally different mindset to use

smacktoward 8y ago
Vim doesn't have a 1990s UX; it has a 1970s UX. "Modal interface where you do everything from the keyboard" was old UX before MSN was born.
- asveikau 8y ago
  gvim, however, looks pretty 1990s in its use of GUI elements surrounding the editor part. I wondered if that is what they meant.
agumonkey 8y ago
win95 is still peak average GUI to me. not the full os, just the ux idioms, even if they are limited (unlike the ultra dynamic material design); for graphical ergonomy, they're the 80%. xerox may have had the 90% gui but history couldn't take that road.
- MrRadar 8y ago
  I think Classic MacOS/System 7 (from the same era) holds up pretty well too. It's been a long, slow decline ever since. Hopefully the trends will come back around soon. EDIT: I just remembered a video I found a month ago with a mock-up of a "Windows 95 Mobile" OS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0DDQumaaCg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0DDQumaaCg The screens that look like they were mocked up specifically for the video (as opposed to the ones that are just screenshots of Windows 9x-era desktop applications) look like they would make for quite a nice UX.
  - agumonkey 8y ago
    yeah quite probably, I never owned a classic mac (only a mac mini but ran headless) As a teen I despised this gui paradigm, I found it too limited, I actually wanted something like a smalltalk image or an html/js thing where you could extend all the things at will. But with age, I learned that it's rarely necessary.
  - amyjess 8y ago
    There was a lot I liked about System 7, but I always hated how Mac OS handled multitasking. And Mac OS 8 IMO was a massive improvement aesthetically. Back in the day when OS 8 was stuck in development hell, I was a diehard Aaron user just because I liked the look and feel so much. Windows 95's taskbar was a godsend. It was IMO the first GUI approach to multitasking that worked, and on top of that you had Alt-Tab which was the icing on the cake. Mac OS tried to emulate that with Command-Tab, but it never worked as well as on Windows (IMO the only desktop to ever improve on Windows Alt-Tab was KDE, especially when they switched to vertical layout in 3.3 or so). Now, if you started talking about merging the Win95 multitasking UI with the rest of the System 7 GUI and Mac OS 8's theme, you've got my ear.
    - agumonkey 8y ago
      I'd give time for a tiny bsd/linux/rtos with a minuscule gui layer with bit of macos and windows. A secure, a bit modern reincarnation of the old T.Rexes
    - 8y ago
bitwize 8y ago
> or even an iphone (after getting past the touchscreen). Indeed. The iPhone's home screen is basically a nicer looking Program Manager. Mac fans laughed at Windows users during the 90s for having only Program and File Manager instead of a human-friendly spatial desktop.
- ptx 8y ago
  And the iPhone doesn't even have the file manager.
  - gt2 8y ago
    It does now actually, an Apple app named "Files".
com2kid 8y ago
> and someone from 1994 would likeky have little trouble with windows 10, or even an iphone (after getting past the touchscreen). The touch screen is a huge thing, that is like saying "after getting past the mouse" going from the 80s to the 90s. Can you imagine trying to teach someone from 1994 about an iPhone? "So you need to tap and hold on some UI elements. No there isn't an indication which ones, you just sorta guess and get used to it. Yeah like right clicking, except slower, and the menu options aren't consistent. Oh some other elements you tap, but you tap HARD on. Some elements you tap and hold hard on, and here is the manual for all the ways you can tap, double tap, tap and hold, and some other gestures, for that one single button you have. If you get a newer iPhone, the button is gone and instead there are just magic swipes you do from off screen in different directions and distances to get different behaviors." And then try explaining how the file system thing is all sorts of weird.
- roywiggins 8y ago
  I do remember taking a while to work out which things needed single clicks and which needed double clicks when I was first introduced to Windows 95. It was basically undiscoverable for me and I needed someone to tell me a) that double clicking existed and b) to start a program from the desktop I needed to double-click on the icons. I think until then I'd only ever used a Mac desktop, which didn't do the click-to-select thing.
- toast0 8y ago
  Wait, does the iPhone actually ha e a manual that tells you those things? Android and Windows phone basically don't have manuals, so I assumed iPhones don't either.
  - com2kid 8y ago
    Apple's ad campaigns serve as their tutorials. Rather effective ones at that. Their ads always show off the newest interface changes, from the first iPhone ad showing off tapping and pinch to zoom to newer ads showing off force touch and swipe gestures.
- Jtsummers 8y ago

by setr 8y ago

smacktoward 8y ago

Vim doesn't have a 1990s UX; it has a 1970s UX. "Modal interface where you do everything from the keyboard" was old UX before MSN was born.

asveikau 8y ago
gvim, however, looks pretty 1990s in its use of GUI elements surrounding the editor part. I wondered if that is what they meant.

agumonkey 8y ago

win95 is still peak average GUI to me. not the full os, just the ux idioms, even if they are limited (unlike the ultra dynamic material design); for graphical ergonomy, they're the 80%. xerox may have had the 90% gui but history couldn't take that road.

MrRadar 8y ago
I think Classic MacOS/System 7 (from the same era) holds up pretty well too. It's been a long, slow decline ever since. Hopefully the trends will come back around soon. EDIT: I just remembered a video I found a month ago with a mock-up of a "Windows 95 Mobile" OS: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0DDQumaaCg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0DDQumaaCg The screens that look like they were mocked up specifically for the video (as opposed to the ones that are just screenshots of Windows 9x-era desktop applications) look like they would make for quite a nice UX.
- agumonkey 8y ago
  yeah quite probably, I never owned a classic mac (only a mac mini but ran headless) As a teen I despised this gui paradigm, I found it too limited, I actually wanted something like a smalltalk image or an html/js thing where you could extend all the things at will. But with age, I learned that it's rarely necessary.
- amyjess 8y ago
  There was a lot I liked about System 7, but I always hated how Mac OS handled multitasking. And Mac OS 8 IMO was a massive improvement aesthetically. Back in the day when OS 8 was stuck in development hell, I was a diehard Aaron user just because I liked the look and feel so much. Windows 95's taskbar was a godsend. It was IMO the first GUI approach to multitasking that worked, and on top of that you had Alt-Tab which was the icing on the cake. Mac OS tried to emulate that with Command-Tab, but it never worked as well as on Windows (IMO the only desktop to ever improve on Windows Alt-Tab was KDE, especially when they switched to vertical layout in 3.3 or so). Now, if you started talking about merging the Win95 multitasking UI with the rest of the System 7 GUI and Mac OS 8's theme, you've got my ear.
  - agumonkey 8y ago
    I'd give time for a tiny bsd/linux/rtos with a minuscule gui layer with bit of macos and windows. A secure, a bit modern reincarnation of the old T.Rexes
  - 8y ago

bitwize 8y ago

> or even an iphone (after getting past the touchscreen). Indeed. The iPhone's home screen is basically a nicer looking Program Manager. Mac fans laughed at Windows users during the 90s for having only Program and File Manager instead of a human-friendly spatial desktop.

ptx 8y ago
And the iPhone doesn't even have the file manager.
- gt2 8y ago
  It does now actually, an Apple app named "Files".

com2kid 8y ago

> and someone from 1994 would likeky have little trouble with windows 10, or even an iphone (after getting past the touchscreen). The touch screen is a huge thing, that is like saying "after getting past the mouse" going from the 80s to the 90s. Can you imagine trying to teach someone from 1994 about an iPhone? "So you need to tap and hold on some UI elements. No there isn't an indication which ones, you just sorta guess and get used to it. Yeah like right clicking, except slower, and the menu options aren't consistent. Oh some other elements you tap, but you tap HARD on. Some elements you tap and hold hard on, and here is the manual for all the ways you can tap, double tap, tap and hold, and some other gestures, for that one single button you have. If you get a newer iPhone, the button is gone and instead there are just magic swipes you do from off screen in different directions and distances to get different behaviors." And then try explaining how the file system thing is all sorts of weird.

roywiggins 8y ago
I do remember taking a while to work out which things needed single clicks and which needed double clicks when I was first introduced to Windows 95. It was basically undiscoverable for me and I needed someone to tell me a) that double clicking existed and b) to start a program from the desktop I needed to double-click on the icons. I think until then I'd only ever used a Mac desktop, which didn't do the click-to-select thing.
toast0 8y ago
Wait, does the iPhone actually ha e a manual that tells you those things? Android and Windows phone basically don't have manuals, so I assumed iPhones don't either.
- com2kid 8y ago
  Apple's ad campaigns serve as their tutorials. Rather effective ones at that. Their ads always show off the newest interface changes, from the first iPhone ad showing off tapping and pinch to zoom to newer ads showing off force touch and swipe gestures.
Jtsummers 8y ago