How UI degrades over time.
Top (Windows 95): great contrast, obvious shapes. Instantly readable.
Middle (Windows 11): shapes are still self-explanatory, but contrast is gone.
Bottom (Windows 11 Insiders): what am I even looking at? The only shape I can understand here is the Run button. Barely visible, though.
Then, on the left, there’s another something that says Run and has an icon. What is it? A window title? Another button? Why does it have to say Run twice?
... 1/3
... Shell:startup looks like a header but from what I understand is actually your previous command. Also, why is it aligned so poorly? Text to icon, bottom padding?
Finally, the text input. Do you see it? I don’t. But it’s there. The only hint is a barely visible white (???) cursor before the placeholder. How do we know it’s a placeholder? We don’t.
The original Windows 95 interface is _functional_. It has a function and it ... 2/3
... executes it very well. It works for you, without trying to be clever or sophisticated. Also, it follows system conventions, which also helps you, the user.
I’m not sure whom the bottom interface helps. It’s a puzzle, an art object, but it doesn’t work for you. It’s not here to make your life easier.
Bottom image source: https://x.com/phantomofearth/status/1996660509027062148
@grumpy_website
Usability/UX is hard. And Microsoft... well, I think every third or fourth decision they make is good, the rest is bad.
I mean... Start menu button in the middle? Why was there more than one person who thought that was a good idea?
And yes, I know. You copied it from macOS after Apple copied it from CDE.
Are you going to copy Liquid Gl... too?
If you want unreadable text, I can show you some places in Entra where the idea that a dark mode would ever be available was clearly too abstract for the developer working on it.
Grumpy Website
Not a Spring Onion
Maura Hubbell