Ö
--= Ö§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí =--
Windows has been annoying me from many years now, so I've devised a
little test for it. Let's see how Windows stacks up to the rules of good
design*...
"Rule of Modularity: Write simple parts connected by clean interfaces.
Parts of Windows are neither clean nor simple. It is a jumble of
conflicting standards, failed legacy code, and counterproductive,
reationary marketing decisions.
Rule of Clarity: Clarity is better than cleverness.
Windows is overflowing with marketing cleverness. Windows is purposely
obfuscated to maintain control of desktop and internet standards strictly
in Micro$oft's hands.
Rule of Composition: Design programs to be connected to other programs.
Micro$oft designs their programs to dominate other programs. Micro$oft
subverts open standards.
Rule of Separation: Separate policy from mechanism; separate interfaces
from engines.
It is impossible to manually configure Windows. Windows configuration
relies on the windows GUI, which does not allow full configuration and
lacks certain key functions. You are left with only with what you (the
average user) are ALLOWED to configure. Once again, this in keeping with
Micro$oft's marketing tactics.
Rule of Simplicity: Design for simplicity; add complexity only where you
must.
Micro$oft is not concerned with elegant solutions, it is concerned
strictly with market dominance, and expanse into new markets.
Rule of Parsimony: Write a big program only when it is clear by
demonstration that nothing else will do.
See the "Rule of Simplicity".
Rule of Transparency: Design for visibility to make inspection and
debugging easier.
Windows is designed to hide as much of its functionality as possible,
forcing users and developers to rely on Micro$oft published information,
expensive contracts and dubious technical assistance. All too often the
solution we hear is "reinstall the OS". This is not a sign of a good
system, or a manageable one.
Rule of Robustness: Robustness is the child of transparency and
simplicity.
As demonstrated countless times, Windows is not a robust product, it is
more akin to Humpty Dumpty. Crash-prone, insecure, and bloated.
Rule of Least Surprise: In interface design, always do the least
surprising thing.
As demonstrated countless times, the Windows interface, like a nagging
salesman, is full of unwelcome surprises.
Rule of Repair: When you must fail, fail noisily and as soon as possible.
Windows has been in a slow decline for years. Its inevitable failure has
been postponed repeatedly and has made the situation even more difficult
to repair. When Micro$oft had a chance to make a clean break with Windows
XP, it instead chose to continue the same old failed policies.
Rule of Economy: Programmer time is expensive; conserve it in preference
to machine time.
It now takes literally an army of programmers to maintain Humpty Dumpty,
let alone make any significant additions. What will happen to Micro$oft's
ability to update and support Humpty Dumpty if it can no longer maintain
that army? With ~$40B that's not likely to happen soon, but one day it
just might.
Rule of Generation: Avoid hand-hacking; write programs to write programs
when you can.
Technically this is the one rule M$ does not break, but perhaps to a
fault. Too many programmers, and too much abstraction can turn a product
into Humpty Dumpty.
Rule of Optimization: Prototype before polishing. Get it working before
you optimize it.
See the "Rule of Repair". Windows XP was based on a flawed design, rather
than a new prototype.
Rule of Diversity: Distrust all claims for “one true way”.
The "one true way" for Windows has always been whatever M$ marketing
commands. If it defies all logic, and all good reason but helps M$
conquer another piece of the market, it will be put into Windows, and
shoved onto the desktops of unsuspecting users.
Rule of Extensibility: Design for the future, because it will be here
sooner than you think."
While Micro$oft seems to have some sort of long-term strategy for
Windows, it is always corrupted by their reactionary marketing decisions.
The result is that Micro$oft Windows is basically a mediocre piece of
crap, a knock-off of far better products and ideas.
* These rules are from Unix Philosophy 101
--
--=( Ö§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí )=----- ----- --- - -
Rebel Alliance Galactic Usenet News Service
--- --- ---=================----------- - -
Bin Laden, before turning to the Dark Side:
http://www.sid-ss.net/911/obl-at14.jpg
little test for it. Let's see how Windows stacks up to the rules of good
design*...
"Rule of Modularity: Write simple parts connected by clean interfaces.
Parts of Windows are neither clean nor simple. It is a jumble of
conflicting standards, failed legacy code, and counterproductive,
reationary marketing decisions.
Rule of Clarity: Clarity is better than cleverness.
Windows is overflowing with marketing cleverness. Windows is purposely
obfuscated to maintain control of desktop and internet standards strictly
in Micro$oft's hands.
Rule of Composition: Design programs to be connected to other programs.
Micro$oft designs their programs to dominate other programs. Micro$oft
subverts open standards.
Rule of Separation: Separate policy from mechanism; separate interfaces
from engines.
It is impossible to manually configure Windows. Windows configuration
relies on the windows GUI, which does not allow full configuration and
lacks certain key functions. You are left with only with what you (the
average user) are ALLOWED to configure. Once again, this in keeping with
Micro$oft's marketing tactics.
Rule of Simplicity: Design for simplicity; add complexity only where you
must.
Micro$oft is not concerned with elegant solutions, it is concerned
strictly with market dominance, and expanse into new markets.
Rule of Parsimony: Write a big program only when it is clear by
demonstration that nothing else will do.
See the "Rule of Simplicity".
Rule of Transparency: Design for visibility to make inspection and
debugging easier.
Windows is designed to hide as much of its functionality as possible,
forcing users and developers to rely on Micro$oft published information,
expensive contracts and dubious technical assistance. All too often the
solution we hear is "reinstall the OS". This is not a sign of a good
system, or a manageable one.
Rule of Robustness: Robustness is the child of transparency and
simplicity.
As demonstrated countless times, Windows is not a robust product, it is
more akin to Humpty Dumpty. Crash-prone, insecure, and bloated.
Rule of Least Surprise: In interface design, always do the least
surprising thing.
As demonstrated countless times, the Windows interface, like a nagging
salesman, is full of unwelcome surprises.
Rule of Repair: When you must fail, fail noisily and as soon as possible.
Windows has been in a slow decline for years. Its inevitable failure has
been postponed repeatedly and has made the situation even more difficult
to repair. When Micro$oft had a chance to make a clean break with Windows
XP, it instead chose to continue the same old failed policies.
Rule of Economy: Programmer time is expensive; conserve it in preference
to machine time.
It now takes literally an army of programmers to maintain Humpty Dumpty,
let alone make any significant additions. What will happen to Micro$oft's
ability to update and support Humpty Dumpty if it can no longer maintain
that army? With ~$40B that's not likely to happen soon, but one day it
just might.
Rule of Generation: Avoid hand-hacking; write programs to write programs
when you can.
Technically this is the one rule M$ does not break, but perhaps to a
fault. Too many programmers, and too much abstraction can turn a product
into Humpty Dumpty.
Rule of Optimization: Prototype before polishing. Get it working before
you optimize it.
See the "Rule of Repair". Windows XP was based on a flawed design, rather
than a new prototype.
Rule of Diversity: Distrust all claims for “one true way”.
The "one true way" for Windows has always been whatever M$ marketing
commands. If it defies all logic, and all good reason but helps M$
conquer another piece of the market, it will be put into Windows, and
shoved onto the desktops of unsuspecting users.
Rule of Extensibility: Design for the future, because it will be here
sooner than you think."
While Micro$oft seems to have some sort of long-term strategy for
Windows, it is always corrupted by their reactionary marketing decisions.
The result is that Micro$oft Windows is basically a mediocre piece of
crap, a knock-off of far better products and ideas.
* These rules are from Unix Philosophy 101
--
--=( Ö§âmâ ßíñ Këñ0ßí )=----- ----- --- - -
Rebel Alliance Galactic Usenet News Service
--- --- ---=================----------- - -
Bin Laden, before turning to the Dark Side:
http://www.sid-ss.net/911/obl-at14.jpg
