Hacker News Reader

Comment by lawdawg | Hacker News Reader

I am the only one that finds Metro to be ugly (hate the color choices and block-y design) and cluttered? This does not strike me as something I want to see on my home screen:

http://d35lb3dl296zwu.cloudfront.net/uploads/photo/image/769...

Regardless, I'm wondering if the average consumer feels the same way as well. WP7 is not selling well, and WP8 (and the new Lumias) don't really differentiate themselves that much from the previous iteration in terms of what a consumer will see in the first few minutes of using the phone.

Also, this is DOA in the US if they are AT&T exclusive.

View on HN

I was surprised to see a view like that being promoted. I love Metro, but I hate app makers that don't keep to the Metro aesthetic. When it's done right:

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/nokia-...

I think it looks fantastic, and communicates more than the iPhone home screen without the mess of the Android one.

Even in those two screens, everything just blends together (especially with the white text on yellow tiles). Just seems like a usability nightmare imo.

Regardless, I don't find Android home screens messy at all (although there are a few widgets that are poorly made), and with the customization ability that's provided with custom ROMs, it can be as beautiful as you want it to be.

TBH it doesn't ever really look that messy. That's just a marketing photo. Most of the time, it's pretty clean looking and intuitive. A few applications abuse that but they are usually not worth keeping anyway.

You really have to use it for an hour or two to get a feel for how nice it really is.

For reference, WP7 devices are still selling like hot cakes in the UK at least. We've had around 50 people (33% of our workforce) switch to WP recently and I'm watching a lot of them appear in users' hands.

I think it might suck more in the US unfortunately.

I don't know, actually using the phones, it's very easy and quick to scan through the screens and actually use the interface. The screens are usually very simple and light. If you don't have the blocks you have a simple list, or a screen with very little chrome held together by typography and whitespace. So blockiness can be good. Web site usability books are always saying people scan sites, they don't read them.

I do think it is kind of ugly actually, but it's so damn usable I like it anyway. Before Windows 8 I'd always turn off all the special effects like Aero and have a dull gray bar that just worked snappy on my Desktop. Finally with Windows 8 I can tolerate the defaults.

And the scrolling is so buttery smooth, even on the phones since 7, that Android didn't catch up until JellyBean.

Yes, both WP8 and Windows 8 start screens look like walls of blinking Flash banners to me. I won't judge a GUI without having actually used it, but it sure doesn't give me a good first impression.

No, you are not the only one. Their choice of color is abysmal. Have you seen Server Manager in Server 2012? Awful, just awful.

At least the icons fit the home screen properly this time.

You do realise that you can change the colour?

Server Manager 2012 - agree. That's just horrible.

I felt the WP7 icons looked 'ok' until I saw/used them in person. The movement aspects of the tiles, personally, are important to the overall feel of the home screen. I really liked the tile interface after using it (so much so I switch to a WP).

WP8 is definitely more cluttered-looking than WP7 before it. But overall, it's just blocks of color, and in many (app) cases ugly colors.

Have you used WP beyond seeing screenshots? That homescreen is that way because they want to show the flexibility of tiles in Windows Phone 8.

Coloring Metro to be ugly based on that is almost like seeing a MySpace page and calling HTML/CSS ugly looking.

If you take the mini tile out of the equation, here's a video showcasing WP 7.5 (WP8 can be made to look like this).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=locNEna0of4&feature=plcp

What's ugly about that? People's tastes differ, of course, but a lot of people use it and seem to like it for the most part.

If you're really interested in the design philosophy instead of seeing a screenshot and knocking it down in a knee jerk comment(Well, this is HN with its biases, who am I kidding), here's some analysis of Metro's alternative approach.

http://www.riagenic.com/archives/487

http://www.riagenic.com/archives/493

http://www.riagenic.com/archives/526

>Also, this is DOA in the US if they are AT&T exclusive.

>Regardless, I'm wondering if the average consumer feels the same way as well. WP7 is not selling well, and WP8 (and the new Lumias) don't really differentiate themselves that much from the previous iteration in terms of what a consumer will see in the first few minutes of using the phone.

Even the Lumia 900 with the deprecated WP7 had decent sales and was second on AT&T after the iPhone and then beat the One X till the S3 came into the picture and WP8 was announced.

http://www.wpcentral.com/sites/wpcentral.com/files/postimage...

Edit:

Here's Woz calling it a no contest.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/28/2983312/steve-wozniak-wind...

And here's Scott Adams thoughts after trying WP:

http://dilbert.com/blog/entry/windows_phone_challenge_result...

USER INTERFACE

    Samsung/Windows: GREAT

    iPhone: GOOD

    HTC EVO 3D/Android: POOR

>The Windows phone has the best user interface experience, although the onscreen keyboard is problematic just as it is with the other phones I used. The Windows interface is intuitive, simple, and has a liveliness that I find appealing. Voice call quality was good, and battery life seemed good too. I declare it the winner compared to my iPhone 3GS with AT&T and my HTC EVO 3D with Android on the Sprint network.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com