This is not an exercise in Microsoft bashing, rather it is a reflection on the basic differences in user experience philosophy on each platform. Obviously I prefer the Mac way but there are some work flow advantages to be found on the other side.

I recently found myself sitting in front of my Windows box looking at a web page I’d been working on. What I noticed was not an IE display problem but the fact that I’d misspelled page the title. Normally I only use XP to see how web pages display on Internet Explorer, not actually edit pages. But this was a small problem, and rather than go back in the other room and fix it on my Mac I just fixed the problem then.

It has been a couple of months since I actually edited anything in Windows and I was struck at how different my Windows editor, HTML Kit, looked than skEdit my current Mac favorite. I think it’s informative to see screenshots of each program here.

First, I want to point out that skEdit is one of the few Mac programs that follows a couple of standard Windows conventions that I appreciate:

• Like modern web browsers, but few other Mac programs, it has tabs. I can have several documents open without having to juggle multiple floating windows.
• skEdit also uses panes instead of floating palettes. I don’t understand why some Mac programs offer, often different sized, floating palettes instead of integrating everything in a single unified interface. If we need to have palettes, then I’d like to see them follow Adobe’s lead and make the dock-able, the same width, and able to attach to each other. Macromedia and Microsoft both did that to good effect.

These have been standard conventions in the Windows world for years and we are just starting to see this kind of interface in Mac programs. This may strike old Mac hands as sacrilege but it’s a place where we’ve lagged behind in ease of use.

On the other hand, what struck me anew, during my Windows foray, was the incredible number of buttons on HTML Kit. This profusion of buttons is standard on most Windows programs. We see it in the Mac world with, of course, Microsoft Office, and to a lesser degree in Appleworks. I remember once during the era of the ill conceived Word 6, someone published a screenshot of Word with all of it’s menu bars activated. The entire screen was filled with menus and buttons, leaving no room at all for text.

But most Mac programs don’t duplicate the File and Edit menus, let alone other menus, on the program menu bar. It appears that in the Windows world that if there is a program function there will be a corresponding menu button.

To be fair, HTML Kit does allow for a fair degree of menu bar customization. If I wanted to take the time I could streamline the interface considerably, that is if I could remember in which menu (but not on the menu bar) the preferences, er, settings, er, options or whatever this particular Windows program chooses to call it, is. Since I don’t use it that often, I’ve just never bothered. And, I’m not knocking HTML Kit. It is a very capable web editor. This is what a lack of human interface guidelines gets us: non-standardized names and locations for common program elements.

Is it inherently better to limit menu bar buttons and menus to a few, or in the case of TextMate, zero, options than to put every potentially usable button up front and personal? Most user interface (UI) experts would say so. They would say that the goal is to offer the simplest interface that will do the job easily.

On the other hand, I’ve watched numerous Windows users never touch the application menu bar, or use keyboard commands, at all. (I used to teach at a computer learning lab) It seems that they want every option in plain view.

So, while the Mac has a widespread reputation of being easier to use, it’s Windows that actually does more to hand-hold the beginning user. Putting all of a program’s functions on the menu bar is one manifestation of this. Another is the seeming endless number of confirmation dialogs you have to click through to change anything. Do you want to delete this file? Do you really want to delete this file? Are you absolutely sure you want to delete this file?

One other common element in Windows editors is a built-in file browser. I’m pretty neutral on this. It’s there. I don’t know if that’s just because it’s easy to build it in, or because Windows Explorer is more awkward to use than the OS X finder. Whatever the reason, HTML Kit has this feature and Mac editors don’t.

What we’re seeing here is the Windows world catering to the lowest common denominator. I’m going to assume that anyone who choses to edit HTML, let alone PHP, ASP etc., is not a novice who needs to have copy and paste buttons cluttering up the menu bar. It’s a case of protect the beginner at the expense of slowing down the more experienced user.

Maybe I’m wrong here and too deeply indoctrinated into the cult of Mac. Certainly the majority of computer users seem to have no problem with a proliferation of buttons. Maybe it’s a Mac-Zen thing. Maybe Windows users reach a point where they simply don’t see the buttons after a while, the way we don’t see the power lines that inhabit every one of our outdoor views. Or maybe that’s just the way it is and they don’t think to question it. Or maybe it’s a philosophy of attempting to do the user’s thinking for her that seems built into all of Microsoft’s products. And maybe, that’s what the majority of people want.

For me, the whole experience was a reminder that I prefer the Mac because it gets out of my way and simply lets me do what I want to do.

Possibly related:

This entry was posted on Friday, May 5th, 2006 at 12:31 am and is filed under Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.