« Font impoverished | Main | Oh app, for crying out loud, go update yourself »

May 25, 2006


Vlado Klimovsky

Regarding the split toolbar buttons, I actually quite often accidentally click the thin bottom half instead of the big main button :-). It may be that when I move the mouse pointer from the center part of the WMP window up to a toolbar button, I click it as soon as I see it's changed its color. Unfortunately at that time the mouse cursor is still on the thin half...


What is your take on the fact that the "full text search" box is fairly unpredictable and will return different things depending on the view that is currently selected?

I find it rather confusing; predicting what you'll get when you type is like working with a box of chocolates.

Matt Chaput

I don't see how you can possibly call this "clean" or "minimalist." They seem to be doing everything they can do to obscure the button icons and label text with 12-stop goofy gradients.

You can argue that you think it looks good, but it sure as pumpkins ain't minimalist.

Michael Zuschlag

Slick looking UI, but something puzzles me that I’ve seen in other Aero-type screenshots. How do they visual code selectable versus inert elements? As near as I can tell there is no consistency, with different selectable items appearing radically different, and, worse, some selectable and inert elements appearing the same (e.g., the inert (?) expanded title text and the selectable song list). Am I right? It seems to me the difference between inert and selectable is the most important thing the graphic design needs to communicate for actually using the app.

Another thing: why do they have breadcrumbs and a property tree? Aren’t they at least partially redundant, adding clutter and consuming real estate?

Pascal Binggeli

Right-clicking the toolbar button opens the drop-down menu, negating, IMO, the small target area of the split button. But I still find the buttons generally difficult to use.


Actually, I'm not very happy with new UI. Yeah, it's slick and looks cool, but it's alien in Windows XP environment. Maximize/Minimize/Close buttons rendered awfully when hovered over, if you turn on classic menu -- it will suck. The UI in whole is not XP thing (look at WMP 10 for instance).

Now more: we've got IE7 beta, WMP 11 beta and Office2007 beta. ALL THREE LOOK DIFFERENT and do not follow Windows' visual theme. This is not good.


Alex has a good point--this is not good at all.
IE6, WMP 10, and Office 2003 all look the same--and all three follow Windows' visual theme. It seems Microsoft is taking a step backward.


That's sarcasm right? The only one of those 3 that follows the visual theme is IE6.
I can't see why Microsoft can't use a single look for everything, ala GNOME, KDE, or Mac OS X. You can have variations, ala OS X's Aqua vs Brushed Metal vs Plastic, but to have several completely different look 'n feels in one OS seems like madness to me.

Mat Hall

The new UI is OK (bar the aforementioned "ignores completely any adjustments to the display the user may have made" and other problems already listed), but I *REALLY* miss the artist/album expandable trees. I pretty much used those as my only methods of navigating in 10, and now I have to go to the album view and fiddle with the sort order to attempt to replicate the functionality, but it's less compact, slower, and doesn't quite achieve the same result. (I also can't for the life of me work out how to get the list pane back in the visualisation view now I've hidden it.)

I'm looking forward to a post on the Office 2007 UI -- I have a list of complaints about it that's as long as my arm, and I've got quite long arms! :)

The comments to this entry are closed.