The web page which that image is sourced from[0] and the reddit page it is in turn sourced from[1] makes a lot of hand-wavey analogies to optical balancing (which is a real phenomenon[2]) but doesn't make any compelling arguments for why they apply in this specific case.
An alternative explanation is that this intentional imperfection exists to match the unavoidable imperfection which occurred when the cursor graphic was originally drawn as tiny low resolution 1-bit pixel art. It looks correct because we're used to it being slightly wrong. And when viewed at a normal size, the difference is barely perceptible anyway.
I'm honestly not sure any explanation is needed here. Early UX design wasn't always done with as much thought and sophistication as today's software designers (are claiming to) apply. The first Windows systems had plenty of UI blunders that make the cursor thing look insignificant by comparison, and I can promise you they weren't all about "visual balance" or similar. Lots of them have carried over to later versions.
> there's a (pre-release) 1985 HIG that's quite different. It includes e.g. case studies (useful!), and an extended discussion of Jung's theories of intuition and how they should influence your designs (!!)
The most modern "designers" read is the labels on grocery store items.
Microsoft did a lot of user and interface research. It wasn't as streamlined as Apple's, but it's incorrect to say that they didn't give it much thought.
What's with this myth that Microsoft never cared about UI/UX design? It's simply not true. They're especially not any better at it now than in the 90s and 00s. Modern designers don't put even a fraction of research into UI design than what Microsoft used to do.
Making things intuitive and easily usable was absolutely a priority of Microsoft back then, and they put a lot more thought in that than most modern "UX" design.
Making things pretty wasn't a priority for Microsoft the same way it was for Apple. But I wouldn't call that UX.
I always thought it is obvious - it was done so that it will be well visible on predictable background patterns. Otherwise (if it would be a clean vertical, horizontal, 45 degree design) it would easily "hide" in plain sight, sticking to grids, window borders. Blend in too easily.
UX may not have been as big back then but there’s nooo way no one noticed it being uneven if there was any designer involved. I just always assumed it was an artist’s style choice.
I'd assume it was a deliberate choice because I'd think it'd be easier to implement a graphic with straight lines than with lines just off enough to be noticeable.
I think the apparent contradictions here can be explained quite easily: Apple cared about design, and Microsoft did not.
Looking back from an era in which Apple's sensibility has prevailed, it's quite hard to explain the extent to which Microsoft, at least until the late '90s, really didn't care whether their software looked good. They genuinely didn't see it as important.
Well, Microsoft did hire Susan Kare to design the Windows 3 icons. Kare previously and famously did a lot of early Macintosh GUI design work for Apple. But while Apple saw GUI design as a holistic effort, at Microsoft, the good stuff (e.g. Kare's icons) and the bad stuff (e.g. the sloppily designed mouse cursor) just went hand in hand. Which adds to your point.
The current high-resolution cursor seems like a scaled-up version of the original cursor. Perhaps it's that way for compatibility reason since there are tons of monitors using 100% scaling.
At larger scale factors, Windows renders the cursor from an SVG source. It's not clear if there would be a compatibility issue with straightening the arrow image at larger scales since it uses a hardcoded .cur image at small sizes.
Additionally, Windows 10/11 go to some extent to hide cursor scaling from applications. Win32 GDI/USER calls only see the base 32x32 arrow cursor and only DXGI Output Duplication (screen capture API) can see the real cursor. This causes other problems, though, such as various bugs and inconsistencies with custom cursor images.
a recurring peeve of mine is small tooltips becoming unreadable underneath the cursor which blocks them from being read... then you move the cursor away the tooltip disappears from view... this could actually be fixed at some point in the future
Because Windows is made with poor attention to details and in a tasteless manner. For instance, when Windows XP came out, I remember clearly how some stock icons weren't properly aligned on the same baseline (it was corrected in some later SP).
I didn’t know it’s a joke. I’ve heard about Samsung vs Apple long ago, but never learned how it resolved or if it was about just rounded corners. Probably because of ubiquitous and unmarked jokes like this one, combined with no research on my side. I’m not insulted, but I don’t get why people do that. It’s not far from trolls changing opinions on politics or society standards, just less harmful.
I was replying with a flippant joke to what I took to be a flippant remark/joke about the windows pointer not being "perfect" like Apple's pointer supposedly is.
The fact the post I replied to garnered no similar criticism to my flippant remark shows more about the culture on HN than anything else. That seemingly being: critise everything but Apple, Apple is off limits unless you're hear to fawn over them. This is currently playing out on my karma.
I've made similar flippant remarks/jokes about Google, Microsoft, Meta with no repucussions but god forbid I level some critism at apple!
Your flippant joke is ten years old, has certainly been made thousands of times on this site alone, and is based entirely upon a lack understanding of the issue it targets. At best it’s tired and overplayed. At worst it furthers misunderstanding.
I appreciate the feedback, I'll ignore it, but appreciate that a few off the cuff remarks are able upset you in some profound way. I feel sorry for you.
Maybe take a deep look at why you feel the need to get so upset, and exaggerate the impact my words would have. Set some time apart to work on your mental fortitude, and you'll be happier.
Haha, yeah I mentioned it more out of interest. My karma has fluctuated between ±10 since my initial comment. Currently about where I started. I genuinely find the phenomenon interesting, I've never really understood the blind loyalty apple endears in its fans.
Can’t tell if your other jokes are on the same level, but if they are, why do you expect them to not be downvoted? It’s basically disinformation. Maybe the difference is not Apple vs others, but just whether you were called out by someone or not.
It doesn’t take a fanboy to downvote such thing. I’d surely do, being an anti-fanboy of Apple, Microsoft, Google and Meta, if I knew the truth about the case.
I’m actually butthurt about being misinformed or getting tired by debunking a repeated nonsense that lacks the “joke” tag. Not by the jokes themselves. So yes, I think it’s a good thing there’s a way for users to signal that without explaining. And it’s frustrating that some people will miss the point even when pointed clearly at the reason, or see internet points as something expendable rather than just a feedback.
I didn't see you "debunking" the misinformed nonsense post I was replying to, which I took to be a joke and replied to in a similar vein.
The fact I'm still speaking about my innocuous post and the OP has moved on speaks to the HN culture.
I mean yes it was a flippant remark/joke, yes I thought it was funny (though the humour has definitely been lost now), no I wasn't being serious, and despite appearances no, the post isn't some dangerous fake news statement aimed at subverting people's blind faith in the Apple cult.
Surely internet points are expendable and a form of feedback too? Thats how I know you shouldn't critise Apple on HN, because my internet points disappear. What are they if not expendable, the don't mean anything.
The trouble with text is that it often does not have implied intent. There is no sarcasm font. And when people respond with “can’t you take a joke?” It comes off as dismissive at best, and trolling at worst. Not to mention that “it was just a joke” feels like a hail-Mary attempt to justify a comment that was poorly received.
There was no patent about rounded rectangles. Please stop spreading fake news; News are sensationalized by journalists to the point the reader has an impression they said something that journalists didn’t; Do not repeat them.
It’s just that Samsung was the Concordski of the Concorde, it was copying Apple’s designs to the letter, from the unboxing experience to the charger even to the home button. It was an obvious copyright infringement.
I didn't follow the lawsuit but i remember seeing a large cardboard model of a samsung phone in a store back then; it wasn't similar to whatever Apple was peddling at the time, it was identical. At least from like 5 m.
https://mspoweruser.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/windows-c...