3 ms·
> in that every interactive thing looked interactive I agree in general though i'm not sure Win95 was that consistent. Buttons did look 3D but menus - also int
by badsectoracula 3y ago
> in that every interactive thing looked interactive
I agree in general though i'm not sure Win95 was that consistent. Buttons did look 3D but menus - also interactive - did not. Similarly with the context menu icon at the top left, it was interactive but didn't look like it. Meanwhile Win98 had toolbar buttons become flat.
There was an attempt with Win3.0 (i think) to define a form-follows-function approach where "if something can be interacted with it should be 3D" but even that didn't went far (checkboxes were not 3D nor were edit boxes). By late Win3.1 the ctl3d (i think) DLL was introduced to make everything look 3D regardless of function.
In comparison to today, sure things were better, but it isn't like there was any point in time where things were consistent in terms of control/widget look following its function.
- layer8 3y agoNot every control was 3D, but for example in the menus you had mouseover highlighting that would suggest that you can click the item. And if for some control it wasn’t mouseover highlighting, then it was a tooltip or a changing mouse pointer.
- badsectoracula 3y agoThat was in Windows 98, Windows 95 did not have any mouse hover highlighting. And from a form-follows-function perspective it is still inferior to having a distinct visual style for interactive elements without needing any interaction from the user like mouse hovering.