Bo Persson wrote:
"Joel de Guzman" <joel@boost-consulting.com> skrev i meddelandet news:dhjj0q$fq2$1@sea.gmane.org...
David Abrahams wrote:
Joel de Guzman <joel@boost-consulting.com> writes:
Suman Cherukuri wrote:
No offence taken. Whether we like it or not, it's the reality that the majority of the UI users are comfortable with the existing "standards". One can be bold and come up with a whole new design, but as a commercial developer, I'd be really hesitant to change the face of my software just because it's new (and may be better).
This is total nonsense. Even MS switched the L&F when it switched
from Win3.x to Win95/98 to WinXP. No one complains. Are you saying
that *only* MS has the right to change L&F? Or to be more general, is it the sole right of OS vendors to dictate the L&F?
That may be true as a practical matter. I believe Suman was talking about what users will accept, rather than what anyone has "a right" to do.
Understood. I apologize for my tone. Still, I simply do not buy this "comfortable with the existing standards" thing. OS vendors, including MS, change the L&F all the time. People adjust quickly unless the L&F is too alien.
No. When I moved from win 95 to XP, I expected the applications to look like XP applications. Those that had the old look-and-feel felt really old and were soon replaced.
Maybe you haven't played games or used the media player? Cheers, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net