| ▲ | ChuckMcM 2 hours ago | |
I think Steve was correct in that Windows 95/98/NT/ME/2000 was functional but it wasn't particularly elegant. But the part I think Steve missed was that elegance may get the "ohhs and ahhs" but functionality gets the customers. Back when NeXT was a thing a friend of mine who worked there and I (working at Sun) were having the Workstation UX argument^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hdiscussion. At the time, one component was how there was always like 4 or 5 ways to do the same thing on Windows, and that was alleged to be "confusing and a waste of resources." And the counter argument was that different people would find the ways that work best for them, and having a combinatorial way of doing things meant that there was a probably a way that worked for more people. The difference for me was "taste" was the goal, look good or get things done. For me getting things done won every time. | ||
| ▲ | jimbokun 12 minutes ago | parent [-] | |
Jobs did understand that. In the same quote he says Microsoft earned their success. | ||