6 ms·

How Microsoft misunderstands the concept of user research (& how Apple doesn’t)

27 points by Oestrogen 15y ago

cateye 15y ago
I am using both operating systems intensive daily. In my experience Windows 7 has really far better file management functionality and interaction. I think also that the redesign will be an improvement. Power users can turn the ribbon off and use short cuts.
- iaskwhy 15y ago
  He also points how Finder works today failing to realise Windows has been like that for a while with Libraries: http://www.file-extensions.org/imgs/articles/1/69/microsoft-windows-libraries.png http://www.file-extensions.org/imgs/articles/1/69/microsoft-...
  - sirn 15y ago
    The biggest difference between All My Files and Libraries is that Libraries requires you to manually manage library paths if the file is not stored in default locations. All files shown up in Libraries still retain the hierarchy layout of original directories. All My Files just show recently used files (newly added, recently opened) in Spotlight index categorized by kind (not filetype, e.g. all my .py .rb files are grouped in developer category) and they shown up as a flat list without any hierarchy. I agree that Finder is a bad example, though. (Even though I don't think I need anything more from Lion's Finder.)
steve8918 15y ago
I think the main problem with Microsoft is that their strategies have been more focused on doing things that reinforce their Windows monopoly. I can understand why, since it's what keeps them alive, but it also forces unnatural behavior, like embedding IE into the OS, and prevent natural innovation, which is what Windows is suffering from currently. Now their focus appears to be changing things so that people will upgrade their OS. This is also unnatural behavior, because frankly nothing really needs to be changed anymore, except adding more device drivers and making the OS faster. Changing things around for no particular reason will likely annoy a lot of long-time Windows users (like me). They are providing the exact same functionality, but are just moving things around, to give the illusion of change and value. However, I think one strategy they are doing is that by using the "Ribbon" experience, they are trying to keep newer Windows users from being able to migrate seamlessly to Linux or MacOS. Right now, everything across all the OSes is menu based, so there's little friction in migrating. If a new generation of users are used to the Ribbon, then moving over to Mac or Linux will be "annoying" to them. So I think the article is misunderstanding Microsoft. Microsoft isn't making changes because they want to improve the user experience. They are trying to change the user experience in order to preserve their desktop monopoly by leveraging their new users and preventing a barrier of entry to other OSes. Which makes sense from their perspective because they have the money to do the research, and they manpower and resources to make these sweeping changes.
- dpark 15y ago
  >Microsoft isn't making changes because they want to improve the user experience. They are trying to change the user experience in order to preserve their desktop monopoly by leveraging their new users and preventing a barrier of entry to other OSes. You're looking for a malicious intent in everything Microsoft does. Isn't it possible that the Windows execs simply believe tha the ribbon interface is an improvement rather? Your idea also just doesn't make much sense. If switching to the ribbon adds a large barrier to entry, then it's also a large enough change to discourage customers from upgrading to Windows 8.
  - steve8918 15y ago
    I don't think it's malicious, I think it's self-preservation. It's a fact that their innovation has been strangled because of their strategy to circle the wagons around Windows. Look at what happened once they gave their engineers some breathing space: they created Bing, which is seemingly decent. Also, X-box and especially the Kinnect. Microsoft CAN do innovative things, the only problem is their corporate culture to protect Windows at all costs. Changing the user experience, to me is a competitive enhancement. Do you think people actually cared about that much about menus that it needed to be changed? It's really doubtful. It's obvious that they are trying to differentiate themselves from the other OS's with it. Ribbon was the only major new feature added to Office. Again, it's obvious they were doing this in order to give people a reason to upgrade, because Office is now fully-featured, with very little reason to upgrade. I'm still using Office 2003, and I could probably get away with using Office XP or 97. In terms of discouraging current users, that's why they have the option to remove Ribbon for older customers, but they will default to the new way for new users. I'm still using the Windows 95 interface on Windows 7.
    - mkr-hn 15y ago
      Have you used the ribbon interface in Office?
      - steve8918 15y ago
camtarn 15y ago
Okay, and once the users have found their documents in the beautiful Finder, what are they going to do with them? This seems to be another case of someone confusing attractiveness with usability. The article fails to explain why the author thinks that the Finder makes it easier and/or more obvious for users to figure out how to manipulate their files. What are the motivations and needs of these users (apart from 'I want to see icons representing my files') and how are they fulfilled or not fulfilled by the Explorer and Finder interfaces? Instead of using a data-driven approach, what would be a better way to go about the motivation analysis, and what sort of end result might you get? It's one thing to slag off Microsoft (unfortunately, they tend to make themselves a fairly easy target), but doing so with no constructive advice to others in the same situation is a bit pointless.
- pooriaazimi 15y ago
  Finder is not all about beauty. What I like most about Finder (which makes me cry every time I have to use Windows) is QuickLook. It's SO much easier to quickly glance at a document than anything WE has to offer. I personally hate ribbons, but I think for the average user they are great, and much easier to use. So I'm not defending Apple here, I'm just saying that It's not all about beauty or slickness; Finder is also powerful, but in its own ways (only if it had tabs...)
  - camtarn 15y ago
    QuickLook is a brilliant power user tool which I wish Explorer had - but, like many of Finder's features, it's hardly discoverable without either hearing about it first, or being willing to press random keys to see what they do (which many computer users are very unwilling to do.)
    - openbear 15y ago
      >> it's hardly discoverable without either hearing about >> it first, or being willing to press random keys to >> see what they do I agree that the hotkey for it is not very discoverable, but the default layout for the Finder toolbar has a button for Quick Look (it's in his screenshot, the one that looks like an eyeball).
sriramk 15y ago
Has the OP even used Explorer? The 'All my files' is done through libraries and has been around for ages. And I'm not sure whether Finder is more visually appealing but it sure is not a great file management tool by any means. The real question is - what does success look like? If MSFT is able to prove statistically that users are able to perform file operations quicker, find commands that they never knew existed before, would that validate this design?
kenjackson 15y ago
Actually this blog post I think is a perfect example of how "designers" in the large don't get it. The ribbon was largely maligned for Office too by the web intelligencia, but as someone who spent time in the enterprise both consulting and selling apps, the ribbon is generally loved by its users. The people who hate the ribbon are the people who use OSX. Try giving Word 2003 to anyone who has spent any time with Word 2010 and you'll be seriously reprimanded. For example, Had they performed a deeper analysis of the motivations and needs of the users, they would most probably have ended up with a completely different solution. They might have had a solution that wouldn’t be held back by assumptions and limitations made in earlier versions of the application. This article assumes that this is the second version of Windows ever shipped. They assume that this research hasn't taken place at all in the past. That the existing set of functionality hasn't evolved over time. For example the Win7 task bar is the result of this evolution. File managers are a very specific beast though. I get the feeling the author of the blog post doesn't know them very well. And the author concludes comparing Finder to Explorer. I don't think I'm alone in finding Finder an inferior user experience. And frankly, I think that most users will find the ribbon to be a vast improvement. The mere addition of a more obvious "Open With" button will save me on support calls.
- steve8918 15y ago
  I recently started using a Mac about 6 months ago, and I'm surprised at how terrible some of the user experiences are. The Base OS is nice, but there's a lot to be desired by many of their applications. Finder is probably my #1 biggest complaint, because finding files is so hard to do with it.
  - mstroeck 15y ago
    Have you heard of Spotlight? It's the button at the upper right of your screen. It indexes all your files. If you are talking about files that belong to the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X: that's what locate is for, for example - try typing that into a Terminal window.
    - 15y ago
mikerg87 15y ago
If you look at comments Steve Jobs made at one of the All Things D, you know that Apple wants the file system and finder gone from the user experience. It believes the apps should manage this complexity for you. You can see this embodied in iPhoto and iTunes and you see it in how Pages and Numbers now work in Lion
- Ihavenoname 15y ago
  This strikes to the heart of the article. Mentoning finder is a poor example? Finder should only be a fall back most of the files should be automatically connected to an app. It seems such an alien concept that many windows users can not grasp it even after they switch. I think the the windows mobile OS is moving in the same direction but I expect a lot of resistance to implementing it platform wide. The ultimate concern is that windows will spend all their time on marginal improvements to how things are done where they could skip all that hassle entirely like you can with the iPhone and some of the latest Mac apps. Lion isn't there yet there is a strong argument for just using a tablet. The explorer finder and all the other expectations for what is in an OS just get in the way. Most people just want a gadget that gets things done not sometihingnthey need to root and (re)program. Windows 3.1 had a pretty awesome file acess system for the time win 2000 nt was the best though clean search with predictable results. That is an aside if you need to extensively use search or curate your files something is suboptimal in tour apps.
ams6110 15y ago
The point that (most) users just want to "find their files" and not "explore the filesystem" is a good one. That said I think both Apple and Microsoft have not found the optimal solution but instead seem to be stuck in local maxima. I actually tend to use the shell for almost all file management tasks. But it seems to me to be an exercise in futility to try and make a file manager app that pleases both users who just "want to find their files" and those who want to be able to organize them in a specific way or for other reasons need more direct visualization of the underlying filesystem.
- masklinn 15y ago
  > That said I think both Apple and Microsoft have not found the optimal solution but instead seem to be stuck in local maxima. The Finder is not a maxima in any search space. It's always been terrible (where always == since OSX was first released) and it has not significantly improved over time. As to Windows's explorer, I've find it regressing over time: I have not found 7's explorer to be superior to 2k/XP's under any metric, instead it's more confusing (menubar randomly hiding and showing), it defaults to completely pointless and insane options (Burn as one third of the sparse toolbar? Really?) and the search UI is a severe downgrade from XP's once you get to your results.
  - iaskwhy 15y ago
    On the upside you have the amazing breadcrumbs... I do prefer Windows 7's explorer to any other version before.
    - masklinn 15y ago
      > On the upside you have the amazing breadcrumbs... The only use I've had so far for them was confusing me as to how I could edit the address bar to jump to an arbitrary location. I've yet to use these things at all, although I don't mind them much. Same as the finder's path bar (or the contextual crumbs menu on finder titles), checked out, never used.
mkr-hn 15y ago
I like the ribbon. I'm glad they're starting to use it more outside Office.
nchlswu 15y ago
This analysis has very little to do with User Research. The analysis is all about a fundamental difference in the approach that Microsoft and Apple take to file management. Microsoft's solution may not be "elegant" or changing their current paradigm, but a paradigm shift is very difficult, especially when you have to accomodate many legacy users. Microsoft's solution always looked (to me) like a decent incremental solution that would work for the Windows user base. What's wrong with that? It may not be as elegant as it can be, but it's definitely not as ugly as so many are making it out to be. And if it works, what's wrong with that?
rplst8 15y ago
He misses the point entirely. If one wants to do in Windows what he suggests is so integral to Finder one uses the "recent files" link in the Start menu or any open file dialog. The purpose of the original blog post was to improve what Windows Explorer was designed to do - manage large sets of files and folders.
recoiledsnake 15y ago
For the last time, power users can make it look like this http://blogs.msdn.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communityserver-blogs-components-weblogfiles/00-00-01-29-43-metablogapi/4380.Figure-24-_2D00_-Alex_2700_s-customizations_5F00_2.png http://blogs.msdn.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communit... There's more shortcuts than ever now. Power users need to realize that the default look should be oriented towards the normal user to make things more discoverable, since power users are the ones than can easily configure things to their liking unlike regular users. When you're designing an interface for more than 1 billion users, you have to make a lot of trade-offs.

27 points by Oestrogen 15y ago

I am using both operating systems intensive daily. In my experience Windows 7 has really far better file management functionality and interaction. I think also that the redesign will be an improvement. Power users can turn the ribbon off and use short cuts.

iaskwhy 15y ago
He also points how Finder works today failing to realise Windows has been like that for a while with Libraries: http://www.file-extensions.org/imgs/articles/1/69/microsoft-windows-libraries.png http://www.file-extensions.org/imgs/articles/1/69/microsoft-...
- sirn 15y ago
  The biggest difference between All My Files and Libraries is that Libraries requires you to manually manage library paths if the file is not stored in default locations. All files shown up in Libraries still retain the hierarchy layout of original directories. All My Files just show recently used files (newly added, recently opened) in Spotlight index categorized by kind (not filetype, e.g. all my .py .rb files are grouped in developer category) and they shown up as a flat list without any hierarchy. I agree that Finder is a bad example, though. (Even though I don't think I need anything more from Lion's Finder.)

steve8918 15y ago

I think the main problem with Microsoft is that their strategies have been more focused on doing things that reinforce their Windows monopoly. I can understand why, since it's what keeps them alive, but it also forces unnatural behavior, like embedding IE into the OS, and prevent natural innovation, which is what Windows is suffering from currently. Now their focus appears to be changing things so that people will upgrade their OS. This is also unnatural behavior, because frankly nothing really needs to be changed anymore, except adding more device drivers and making the OS faster. Changing things around for no particular reason will likely annoy a lot of long-time Windows users (like me). They are providing the exact same functionality, but are just moving things around, to give the illusion of change and value. However, I think one strategy they are doing is that by using the "Ribbon" experience, they are trying to keep newer Windows users from being able to migrate seamlessly to Linux or MacOS. Right now, everything across all the OSes is menu based, so there's little friction in migrating. If a new generation of users are used to the Ribbon, then moving over to Mac or Linux will be "annoying" to them. So I think the article is misunderstanding Microsoft. Microsoft isn't making changes because they want to improve the user experience. They are trying to change the user experience in order to preserve their desktop monopoly by leveraging their new users and preventing a barrier of entry to other OSes. Which makes sense from their perspective because they have the money to do the research, and they manpower and resources to make these sweeping changes.

dpark 15y ago
>Microsoft isn't making changes because they want to improve the user experience. They are trying to change the user experience in order to preserve their desktop monopoly by leveraging their new users and preventing a barrier of entry to other OSes. You're looking for a malicious intent in everything Microsoft does. Isn't it possible that the Windows execs simply believe tha the ribbon interface is an improvement rather? Your idea also just doesn't make much sense. If switching to the ribbon adds a large barrier to entry, then it's also a large enough change to discourage customers from upgrading to Windows 8.
- steve8918 15y ago
  I don't think it's malicious, I think it's self-preservation. It's a fact that their innovation has been strangled because of their strategy to circle the wagons around Windows. Look at what happened once they gave their engineers some breathing space: they created Bing, which is seemingly decent. Also, X-box and especially the Kinnect. Microsoft CAN do innovative things, the only problem is their corporate culture to protect Windows at all costs. Changing the user experience, to me is a competitive enhancement. Do you think people actually cared about that much about menus that it needed to be changed? It's really doubtful. It's obvious that they are trying to differentiate themselves from the other OS's with it. Ribbon was the only major new feature added to Office. Again, it's obvious they were doing this in order to give people a reason to upgrade, because Office is now fully-featured, with very little reason to upgrade. I'm still using Office 2003, and I could probably get away with using Office XP or 97. In terms of discouraging current users, that's why they have the option to remove Ribbon for older customers, but they will default to the new way for new users. I'm still using the Windows 95 interface on Windows 7.
  - mkr-hn 15y ago
    Have you used the ribbon interface in Office?
    - steve8918 15y ago

camtarn 15y ago

Okay, and once the users have found their documents in the beautiful Finder, what are they going to do with them? This seems to be another case of someone confusing attractiveness with usability. The article fails to explain why the author thinks that the Finder makes it easier and/or more obvious for users to figure out how to manipulate their files. What are the motivations and needs of these users (apart from 'I want to see icons representing my files') and how are they fulfilled or not fulfilled by the Explorer and Finder interfaces? Instead of using a data-driven approach, what would be a better way to go about the motivation analysis, and what sort of end result might you get? It's one thing to slag off Microsoft (unfortunately, they tend to make themselves a fairly easy target), but doing so with no constructive advice to others in the same situation is a bit pointless.

pooriaazimi 15y ago
Finder is not all about beauty. What I like most about Finder (which makes me cry every time I have to use Windows) is QuickLook. It's SO much easier to quickly glance at a document than anything WE has to offer. I personally hate ribbons, but I think for the average user they are great, and much easier to use. So I'm not defending Apple here, I'm just saying that It's not all about beauty or slickness; Finder is also powerful, but in its own ways (only if it had tabs...)
- camtarn 15y ago
  QuickLook is a brilliant power user tool which I wish Explorer had - but, like many of Finder's features, it's hardly discoverable without either hearing about it first, or being willing to press random keys to see what they do (which many computer users are very unwilling to do.)
  - openbear 15y ago
    >> it's hardly discoverable without either hearing about >> it first, or being willing to press random keys to >> see what they do I agree that the hotkey for it is not very discoverable, but the default layout for the Finder toolbar has a button for Quick Look (it's in his screenshot, the one that looks like an eyeball).

sriramk 15y ago

Has the OP even used Explorer? The 'All my files' is done through libraries and has been around for ages. And I'm not sure whether Finder is more visually appealing but it sure is not a great file management tool by any means. The real question is - what does success look like? If MSFT is able to prove statistically that users are able to perform file operations quicker, find commands that they never knew existed before, would that validate this design?

kenjackson 15y ago

Actually this blog post I think is a perfect example of how "designers" in the large don't get it. The ribbon was largely maligned for Office too by the web intelligencia, but as someone who spent time in the enterprise both consulting and selling apps, the ribbon is generally loved by its users. The people who hate the ribbon are the people who use OSX. Try giving Word 2003 to anyone who has spent any time with Word 2010 and you'll be seriously reprimanded. For example, Had they performed a deeper analysis of the motivations and needs of the users, they would most probably have ended up with a completely different solution. They might have had a solution that wouldn’t be held back by assumptions and limitations made in earlier versions of the application. This article assumes that this is the second version of Windows ever shipped. They assume that this research hasn't taken place at all in the past. That the existing set of functionality hasn't evolved over time. For example the Win7 task bar is the result of this evolution. File managers are a very specific beast though. I get the feeling the author of the blog post doesn't know them very well. And the author concludes comparing Finder to Explorer. I don't think I'm alone in finding Finder an inferior user experience. And frankly, I think that most users will find the ribbon to be a vast improvement. The mere addition of a more obvious "Open With" button will save me on support calls.

steve8918 15y ago
I recently started using a Mac about 6 months ago, and I'm surprised at how terrible some of the user experiences are. The Base OS is nice, but there's a lot to be desired by many of their applications. Finder is probably my #1 biggest complaint, because finding files is so hard to do with it.
- mstroeck 15y ago
  Have you heard of Spotlight? It's the button at the upper right of your screen. It indexes all your files. If you are talking about files that belong to the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X: that's what locate is for, for example - try typing that into a Terminal window.
  - 15y ago

mikerg87 15y ago

If you look at comments Steve Jobs made at one of the All Things D, you know that Apple wants the file system and finder gone from the user experience. It believes the apps should manage this complexity for you. You can see this embodied in iPhoto and iTunes and you see it in how Pages and Numbers now work in Lion

Ihavenoname 15y ago
This strikes to the heart of the article. Mentoning finder is a poor example? Finder should only be a fall back most of the files should be automatically connected to an app. It seems such an alien concept that many windows users can not grasp it even after they switch. I think the the windows mobile OS is moving in the same direction but I expect a lot of resistance to implementing it platform wide. The ultimate concern is that windows will spend all their time on marginal improvements to how things are done where they could skip all that hassle entirely like you can with the iPhone and some of the latest Mac apps. Lion isn't there yet there is a strong argument for just using a tablet. The explorer finder and all the other expectations for what is in an OS just get in the way. Most people just want a gadget that gets things done not sometihingnthey need to root and (re)program. Windows 3.1 had a pretty awesome file acess system for the time win 2000 nt was the best though clean search with predictable results. That is an aside if you need to extensively use search or curate your files something is suboptimal in tour apps.

ams6110 15y ago

The point that (most) users just want to "find their files" and not "explore the filesystem" is a good one. That said I think both Apple and Microsoft have not found the optimal solution but instead seem to be stuck in local maxima. I actually tend to use the shell for almost all file management tasks. But it seems to me to be an exercise in futility to try and make a file manager app that pleases both users who just "want to find their files" and those who want to be able to organize them in a specific way or for other reasons need more direct visualization of the underlying filesystem.

masklinn 15y ago
> That said I think both Apple and Microsoft have not found the optimal solution but instead seem to be stuck in local maxima. The Finder is not a maxima in any search space. It's always been terrible (where always == since OSX was first released) and it has not significantly improved over time. As to Windows's explorer, I've find it regressing over time: I have not found 7's explorer to be superior to 2k/XP's under any metric, instead it's more confusing (menubar randomly hiding and showing), it defaults to completely pointless and insane options (Burn as one third of the sparse toolbar? Really?) and the search UI is a severe downgrade from XP's once you get to your results.
- iaskwhy 15y ago
  On the upside you have the amazing breadcrumbs... I do prefer Windows 7's explorer to any other version before.
  - masklinn 15y ago
    > On the upside you have the amazing breadcrumbs... The only use I've had so far for them was confusing me as to how I could edit the address bar to jump to an arbitrary location. I've yet to use these things at all, although I don't mind them much. Same as the finder's path bar (or the contextual crumbs menu on finder titles), checked out, never used.

mkr-hn 15y ago

I like the ribbon. I'm glad they're starting to use it more outside Office.

nchlswu 15y ago

This analysis has very little to do with User Research. The analysis is all about a fundamental difference in the approach that Microsoft and Apple take to file management. Microsoft's solution may not be "elegant" or changing their current paradigm, but a paradigm shift is very difficult, especially when you have to accomodate many legacy users. Microsoft's solution always looked (to me) like a decent incremental solution that would work for the Windows user base. What's wrong with that? It may not be as elegant as it can be, but it's definitely not as ugly as so many are making it out to be. And if it works, what's wrong with that?

rplst8 15y ago

He misses the point entirely. If one wants to do in Windows what he suggests is so integral to Finder one uses the "recent files" link in the Start menu or any open file dialog. The purpose of the original blog post was to improve what Windows Explorer was designed to do - manage large sets of files and folders.

recoiledsnake 15y ago

For the last time, power users can make it look like this http://blogs.msdn.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communityserver-blogs-components-weblogfiles/00-00-01-29-43-metablogapi/4380.Figure-24-_2D00_-Alex_2700_s-customizations_5F00_2.png http://blogs.msdn.com/cfs-filesystemfile.ashx/__key/communit... There's more shortcuts than ever now. Power users need to realize that the default look should be oriented towards the normal user to make things more discoverable, since power users are the ones than can easily configure things to their liking unlike regular users. When you're designing an interface for more than 1 billion users, you have to make a lot of trade-offs.