4 ms·

Did I claim Microsoft did such a study? No. I fucking didn't. Read my reply to the user @picture. I'll post a snippet: "Did Microsoft do this type of test befo

Did I claim Microsoft did such a study? No. I fucking didn't. Read my reply to the user @picture. I'll post a snippet: "Did Microsoft do this type of test before release their OS? I think so... but I'm not 100% sure. Are consumers using these metrics when decrying the UI changes??? I am 100% sure the answer is NO... they are not." Basically what I'm saying here is that your opinion is complete and utter dog shit unless you have metrics to back it up. You obviously don't, so my point still stands. Gay Mullins literally stated that new coke tasted like dog shit. I see a parallel here. Also I did say this: "Inevitably there will be someone who replies to me insisting that it's worse due to some personal yet convincing anecdotal experience. But until you take the UI equivalent of a blind taste test I'm not sure if this is sensation transference or an actual real rational judgement. " That quote above is referring to you. I saw it coming because it's so typical.

svnpenn 5y ago
You directly suggested that Microsoft did UX testing, with no evidence whatsoever. Then you built your entire argument on that fantasy situation, and criticize anyone who calls you out on it. How about instead of talking about some cola story from 30 years ago, you present some actual data for the current issue?
- deltaonefour 5y ago
  I never suggested anything of the sort nor did I imply it. That suggestion was made up by your imagination as my quote was stated before your reply. My argument is simply this, people can be biased, it's worth it to consider it. That's it. You interpreted as an attack. I criticize no one. I usually am very amicable on my replies but you literally came at me with a knife calling my argument nonsense. If your response was more mature then mine would be less harsh. Also why does my argument need data? I made no such claim that the windows UI is better. My claim is that it could be better and that people are biased. The whole point is for people to examine their own biases, and reconsider this thread from a context where you are aware of your own biases. Looks like for your situation your biases are so ingrained you took it as an attack on your identity. For you the windows UI has to be shit... Otherwise your foundational identity of Microsoft as a corporate clown/villain crumbles. Objectively, Your argument needs data. You make an extraordinary claim. Give data or your argument is nonsensical. Additionally: https://careers.microsoft.com/us/en/job/1196136/Senior-UX-Researcher https://careers.microsoft.com/us/en/job/1196136/Senior-UX-Re... Check the job description. It implies Microsoft is data driven in their UX research. The incentive exists as this is a multi billion dollar product. It is very very reasonable to say that every UI change Microsoft proposes requires data given that they hire "researchers" for this. I'm also guessing that Microsoft is aware that there will be backlash against UI changes. It happens every time. What also happens is the animosity against these changes dies down with time. Microsoft of course very likely makes these changes fully aware of this pattern of human behavior.
  - svnpenn 5y ago
    > I never suggested anything of the sort nor did I imply it. That suggestion was made up by your imagination as my quote was stated before your reply. Ah, classic backpedaling now that youve been called out. Good show. > literally came at me with a knife I dont think you know what "literally" means. > What also happens is the animosity against these changes dies down with time. You seem to approach this subject with the idea that Microsoft is right, and has been right in past situations like this. This is just factually wrong, see for examples repeated OS design failure in Windows Vista, Windows 8, Windows 11. Microsoft has made some excellent products, such as Windows 7 and Windows 10. To assume that every situation like this is just "oh the users are crying, they will realize how good this is" over time is just condescending, and false.
    - deltaonefour 5y ago
      >Ah, classic backpedaling now that youve been called out. Good show. I never backpedaled. I literally said that quote was MADE before you even responded. The "show" is in your delusional imagination. >I dont think you know what "literally" means. Who cares. I obviously meant, Figuratively. But your immature attitude makes it seem literal. >You seem to approach this subject with the idea that Microsoft is right, and has been right in past situations like this You seem to have an imagination and you like to make up my opinions. I never said this. All I am saying and I repeat, is that we as users have been wrong before and we could be wrong again. That our biases influence our judgment. This is not to say that we're wrong now, or that we've been wrong all the time before. It is SAYING that we need to pause and consider our biases BEFORE we jump to a conclusion. >To assume that every situation like this is just "oh the users are crying, they will realize how good this is" over time is just condescending, and false. This was never assumed. It was simply stated that it is a possibility. A realistic possibility because it has happened before and it can happen again. Saying that I am condescending when all I am doing is bringing up cautionary advice to bring awareness to our own biases is the sort of witch hunting practices nobody needs on HN. You embody bias, you embody hostility and you embody the type of principles that run against all science. Was my original post condescending? No. Was your reply condescending insulting and offensive? Yes.

svnpenn 5y ago

You directly suggested that Microsoft did UX testing, with no evidence whatsoever. Then you built your entire argument on that fantasy situation, and criticize anyone who calls you out on it. How about instead of talking about some cola story from 30 years ago, you present some actual data for the current issue?

deltaonefour 5y ago
I never suggested anything of the sort nor did I imply it. That suggestion was made up by your imagination as my quote was stated before your reply. My argument is simply this, people can be biased, it's worth it to consider it. That's it. You interpreted as an attack. I criticize no one. I usually am very amicable on my replies but you literally came at me with a knife calling my argument nonsense. If your response was more mature then mine would be less harsh. Also why does my argument need data? I made no such claim that the windows UI is better. My claim is that it could be better and that people are biased. The whole point is for people to examine their own biases, and reconsider this thread from a context where you are aware of your own biases. Looks like for your situation your biases are so ingrained you took it as an attack on your identity. For you the windows UI has to be shit... Otherwise your foundational identity of Microsoft as a corporate clown/villain crumbles. Objectively, Your argument needs data. You make an extraordinary claim. Give data or your argument is nonsensical. Additionally: https://careers.microsoft.com/us/en/job/1196136/Senior-UX-Researcher https://careers.microsoft.com/us/en/job/1196136/Senior-UX-Re... Check the job description. It implies Microsoft is data driven in their UX research. The incentive exists as this is a multi billion dollar product. It is very very reasonable to say that every UI change Microsoft proposes requires data given that they hire "researchers" for this. I'm also guessing that Microsoft is aware that there will be backlash against UI changes. It happens every time. What also happens is the animosity against these changes dies down with time. Microsoft of course very likely makes these changes fully aware of this pattern of human behavior.
- svnpenn 5y ago
  > I never suggested anything of the sort nor did I imply it. That suggestion was made up by your imagination as my quote was stated before your reply. Ah, classic backpedaling now that youve been called out. Good show. > literally came at me with a knife I dont think you know what "literally" means. > What also happens is the animosity against these changes dies down with time. You seem to approach this subject with the idea that Microsoft is right, and has been right in past situations like this. This is just factually wrong, see for examples repeated OS design failure in Windows Vista, Windows 8, Windows 11. Microsoft has made some excellent products, such as Windows 7 and Windows 10. To assume that every situation like this is just "oh the users are crying, they will realize how good this is" over time is just condescending, and false.
  - deltaonefour 5y ago
    >Ah, classic backpedaling now that youve been called out. Good show. I never backpedaled. I literally said that quote was MADE before you even responded. The "show" is in your delusional imagination. >I dont think you know what "literally" means. Who cares. I obviously meant, Figuratively. But your immature attitude makes it seem literal. >You seem to approach this subject with the idea that Microsoft is right, and has been right in past situations like this You seem to have an imagination and you like to make up my opinions. I never said this. All I am saying and I repeat, is that we as users have been wrong before and we could be wrong again. That our biases influence our judgment. This is not to say that we're wrong now, or that we've been wrong all the time before. It is SAYING that we need to pause and consider our biases BEFORE we jump to a conclusion. >To assume that every situation like this is just "oh the users are crying, they will realize how good this is" over time is just condescending, and false. This was never assumed. It was simply stated that it is a possibility. A realistic possibility because it has happened before and it can happen again. Saying that I am condescending when all I am doing is bringing up cautionary advice to bring awareness to our own biases is the sort of witch hunting practices nobody needs on HN. You embody bias, you embody hostility and you embody the type of principles that run against all science. Was my original post condescending? No. Was your reply condescending insulting and offensive? Yes.