On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 02:52:41 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Choices = Headaches
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| I'm sure there's a whole team of UI designers, programmers, and
>| testers who worked very hard on the OFF button in Windows Vista,
>| but seriously, is this the best you could come up with?
>|
>| Image of the menu in Windows Vista for turning off the computer
>|
>| Every time you want to leave your computer, you have to choose
>| between nine, count them, nine options: two icons and seven menu
>| items.
> `----
>
> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/11/21.html
>
> It would have been ironic if the button /still/ said "Start", which is the
> route to /finishing/ a session.
>
> How about navigating through vendor names to find a program that serves a
> certain function (whose name is, in its own right, rarely rhetorical)?
No, the irony is that not long ago, there was at least one Linux advocate
bitching that Windows XP's start menu didn't have more options for for
session management. Now, here we have Joel saying that such options are
poor design.
Now, who was that? Oh yeah, it was YOU.
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/d468cd0620147c90
You claimed this guy had "Very detailed, well-reasoned, and filled with
screenshots to serve as backing proof." Indicating you agreed with his
arguments. Among them was a complaint that you couldn't lock the computer
from the start menu, now you're crowing about how such options are bad
design.
|
|
