3 ms·

Windows faces a dilemma - its most valuable users value it for its deep and broad compatibility, but this compatibility is provided by geological layers of lega

by jl6 5y ago

Windows faces a dilemma - its most valuable users value it for its deep and broad compatibility, but this compatibility is provided by geological layers of legacy cruft, which puts a severe drag on modernization initiatives. Case in point: the bizarre inconsistency of the current Windows 10 UX. The way forward is probably to partition off those compatibility layers somehow, and sell support for them as add-on services, with a price escalator balanced so as to encourage migration to modern APIs, while presenting no cliff-edge that would push customers to competitors.

dataflow 5y ago
The legacy "cruft" is the good stuff. It's the modern Windows 10 UI that stinks. Just because it's old doesn't mean it's bad (or new/good).
- jl6 5y ago
  I’m thinking wider than just UI, but in this example, I think the main reason the “old” UI is perceived as superior is because it was, once, finished, whereas the “new” UI is a perpetual work-in-progress mish-mash of different generations’ worth of UI teams’ competing ideas clashing with each other and creating a total mess. I think the “new” UI is fixable, but the way to do this is to finish it and make it a coherent system, not to add another layer while keeping the old layers hanging around.
  - zo1 5y ago
    One huge glaring example of this is how "settings" are handled in Windows. Half the stuff is in fancy new "metro" UIs that are gimped and practically useless, all web-styled with padding everywhere and choked full of "UX". Whilst we still have the functional and familiar Control Panel. The day they remove the Control Panel is the day I switch to Linux permanently.
    - toyg 5y ago
      The new Settings is indeed a trainwreck. They thought they could get away with a coat of paint, leaving “advanced” stuff to the old UI (too much shit to do, bro!), but the result is an annoying and unusable mishmash. They would have spent their time better by reskinning win32.
- dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
  > The legacy "cruft" is the good stuff. That's clear to everyone except the author of the article. If Windows breaks backward compatibility, what's the reason to use it?

by jl6 5y ago

dataflow 5y ago

The legacy "cruft" is the good stuff. It's the modern Windows 10 UI that stinks. Just because it's old doesn't mean it's bad (or new/good).

jl6 5y ago
I’m thinking wider than just UI, but in this example, I think the main reason the “old” UI is perceived as superior is because it was, once, finished, whereas the “new” UI is a perpetual work-in-progress mish-mash of different generations’ worth of UI teams’ competing ideas clashing with each other and creating a total mess. I think the “new” UI is fixable, but the way to do this is to finish it and make it a coherent system, not to add another layer while keeping the old layers hanging around.
- zo1 5y ago
  One huge glaring example of this is how "settings" are handled in Windows. Half the stuff is in fancy new "metro" UIs that are gimped and practically useless, all web-styled with padding everywhere and choked full of "UX". Whilst we still have the functional and familiar Control Panel. The day they remove the Control Panel is the day I switch to Linux permanently.
  - toyg 5y ago
    The new Settings is indeed a trainwreck. They thought they could get away with a coat of paint, leaving “advanced” stuff to the old UI (too much shit to do, bro!), but the result is an annoying and unusable mishmash. They would have spent their time better by reskinning win32.
dvfjsdhgfv 5y ago
> The legacy "cruft" is the good stuff. That's clear to everyone except the author of the article. If Windows breaks backward compatibility, what's the reason to use it?