Now on more recent windows editions, I find that I often need to wait for the menu to visually appear before it will accept any keyboard input, and the ranking shifts over time and includes web stuff, making this workflow basically useless.

I also really miss the aero look of windows 7... Eye-candy, sure, but I thought it was pretty, clean and modern looking. I am sad they moved away from it.

The specific screenshot they show is the very first start menu they cobbled together for Threshold, which would later be redesigned again before shipping as Windows 10. The screenshot is also showing off early adaptations of Windows 8 apps running in movable windows -- before that, they could only run full- or split-screen!

XP really looked like a Fisher Price toy... I liked the Media Center theme (as well as derivatives) so much more as part of that release.

Windows 7 was probably the best start menu of Windows' history, and Win10/11's taskbar enhancements (not the centering default) are pretty great as well. I'm hoping this gets better/similar in COSMIC.

Funny because Windows 95 contains many ideas from the more ambitious project codenamed Windows Cairo that was intended to mimic NextSTEP. Cairo was never released, but the gray slab 3D look, the "X" button on the top-right corner on Windows 95 are the hallmarks of NextSTEP.

Windows 95's most original GUI idea was the Start menu.

Just based on the start menu alone I can‘t think of any reason for 11 to lead the ranking

Windows 95 was a massive jump in usability.

Regular people simply do no understand the overlapping windows metaphor. When a windows disappears behind another they are often completely helpless. The taskbar was a life saver.

Also reminds me of the layers of UI versions still present in Windows https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27556754

It’s actually pretty ”elegant” design with white, black, grey with two shades of primary color: dark blue and light blue/cyan. Then complementary orange for active selection. The cyan is light enough for black text and blue is dark enough for white text. Really good palette choices.

Remember this was only 16 CGA colors, of which only few are delicate enough for UI components.

The tiny resolution makes things blocky, but if it had more space with an SVGA resolution, it’d be pretty great.

I would dare say, this might be the most ”designed” UI of the bunch, considering limitations.

-

Intresting aspect of the UI is the hilighting of the menu bar in each window:

These days it’s odd to hilight menus, but I think their importance must’ve been much higher due to lack of space in the UI itself. They were basiclly act as ”navigation” and action menus. We use sidepanels and tabs a lot, but those have hard time fittinh there. Also the apps were simpler.

* Also 2000, but at least they seemed to be aware that this too was Windows NT.

Even still have the laptop I used back then, fully with the barely functioning charging port that makes booting it up an exercise in dexterity.

I hope it’s not controversial if I say that in the Apple world, Liquid Glass is, if not the first, certainly the worst regression. And I think this could have been predicted if you agreee with OP about Vista.

Windows UI peaked at Windows 7 and has been steadily in a race to the bottom ever since.

Windows 11 is going to be the final straw that prompts me to relegate it to a game playing or only-use-because-I-must secondary OS. Linux, here I come - if only I could decide which flavour...

Compare that with the half-arsed switch that started from 8 and still continues today with 11. Windows 11 actively removes features and implements the system programs with multiple clunky UI frameworks. While chasing the whatever techbro trend, Microsoft jumped into multiple design trends. Win 11 Settings, Excel, OneNote, Teams, core utilities like Disk Cleanup each of these use a different UI language. I do understand slowly upgrading certain components but newer and actively maintained apps using different UX, come on.

Each of their UI frameworks are suffering from lack of maintenance. For example, WinUI 3 still draws white symbol on white background for window controls and the bug exist in many Microsoft apps including Powertoys and their showcase apps. 11 actively forces users to use Powershell to do almost any medium level customization where 7 had nice UIs for advanced network configuration, extra Bluetooth functions (you could proxy calls on Win 7 over BT, now you have to have a MS account).

Either the author lacks taste or just judges things very shallowly.

Luminance contrast is used to create a hierarchy of importance. Most backgrounds are medium grey, so that all text and icons are low-importance by default. Text fields, dropdowns, check boxes and radio buttons are black-on-white: a subtle call to action. Window, button and scrollbar edges always include pure white or pure black. Active toggle buttons have a light grey background, sacrificing the "3D shading" metaphor in the name of contrast.

Most colour is limited to two accents: pale yellow and navy blue. Small splashes of those colours are mixed together in icons to make them recognisable at a glance. Deactivated icons lose all colour. The grey, yellow and blue palette is highly accessible for colour-blind people, and the yellow and blue accents also occupy unique points in the luminance space (the yellow sits between white and grey, the blue sits between grey and black).

Despite all of this restraint, the designers weren't afraid of high contrast and high saturation; white text on a navy blue background shows up very sparingly, always as a loud "YOU ARE HERE" beacon. The designers understood that navigation is more important than anything else.

The graphics are strictly utilitarian, with no unnecessary texture or visual noise. The entire UI is typeset using just two weights of 9px MS Sans Serif. The only skeuomorphic elements are some program and folder names, a tiny resizing grip at the corner of each window, and a simple simulation of depth when push buttons are clicked. 3D edges are used to make the scene layout easier to parse, not to make it look physical or familiar.

Related components are almost always visually grouped together, using borders, filled rectangles and negative space. (I suspect the designers would have used fewer borders and more fills if the palette of background colours had been a little larger.) Dark and light backgrounds are freely mixed in the same UI, which requires both white and black text to be present. The depth of recursion (boxes in boxes in boxes...) is fairly shallow. Homogeneous collections of components are always enclosed in a strong border and background, which enables sibling components to be displayed with no borders at all between them.

All of these tasteful design choices were fragile, because you can only preserve them if you understand them. Windows XP made the background colours lighter, which reduced the available dynamic range of luminance cues; it tinted many backgrounds and components yellow or blue, which made chrominance more noisy; it introduced gradient fills and gradient strokes, which were less effective at grouping components; it added soft shading to icons, which made their shapes less distinct; and so on. Almost every change broke something, and so after just one major revision of the UI, most of the magic was already gone.

Kinda cool

  - XP was good
  - vista was bad
  - 7 was good
  - 8 was bad
  - 10 was good
  - 11 is .....drumroll please.... bad.