From: "Geo." 

"Jeff Shultz"  wrote in message
news:30uttuoucsp8kv86tkht2g9kptprpvp2o1{at}4ax.com...

> IMNSHO, from a support point of view Win98 had the best interface
> going. Since then they've kept pushing the useful bits deeper and
> deeper down in the layers.

IMO they have gone off in the wrong direction wrt the UI. A user interface
should be static not dynamic, the controls in your car don't move around
depending on who's driving or what gauge you looked at last so features
like MRU have no place in the start menu and if they did then shouldn't
they all be in the same place (mru programs and mru documents all in one
place)? A little consistancy would be nice.

The other thing I don't agree with is Microsoft's use of the desktop. The
desktop is good for 3 things, either you put controls there or you use it
as a work area or you share it so other people can leave stuff on your
desktop. However you look at it, it appears that MS's idea of a desktop is
to display pretty wallpaper and little else as a functional use except
possibly advertising.

The fact that pretty much all the UI designers have missed the usefulness
of a shared desktop just blows me away. They share the stupid scheduler but
not the desktop? Great, so people can schedule stuff to run on my computer
but they can't pass me a project so I see it when I sit down at the
computer? Back to reality, do people put stuff on your desk at work, well
why not let them put it on your desktop then? It's so obvious.

Geo.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4