Comment Re:[X] instead of Cancel (Score 1) 376
As you noted, the popup that was included in the BBC article screenshot very clearly and concisely mentions that "Based on your Windows Update settings, this PC is scheduled to upgrade on...", followed by the date and time in large, bold print, followed by an actionable link that says "Click here to change upgrade schedule or cancel scheduled upgrade". It repeats that the upgrade will be automatically downloaded and installed in smaller italicized print at the bottom. The only actionable UI button element on the popup is a large "OK" button. Per usual dialog box standard UI conventions, clicking a close button is typically analogous to clicking any available "Cancel" button (if one is present) on the dialog, or the "OK" button (if that's the only one present). Regardless, it's typically meant to mean "take no [further] action". However, "Cancel" in this case should not be assumed to mean "cancel whatever operation you are telling me about in this informational dialog box", but rather "cancel showing me this dialog box".
This dialog box is purely informational in nature, and is not a query dialog box. It would be similar to using alert() in javascript, MessageBox() in VB, etc. This is not a dialog box which says "You are about to format your hard drive. Click 'Yes' to continue or 'No' to cancel." In such a case, good UI design would imply that [X] would be analogous to the cancellation of the request that was made which brought up the dialog box in the first place (presumably clicking a "format" icon or similar action). This message box is not making any such statements or asking any such questions.
Closing this window does not have an inherent semantic meaning of "Stop/Cancel this upgrade", in much the same way that opening up my "Scheduled Tasks" application and clicking [X] does not mean I wish to "Stop/Cancel" any/all of the scheduled tasks. Another prime example: click on a file in Windows Explorer, press the Delete key, then click the [X] on the popup that is asking for confirmation. The [X] in that case becomes an analogy for "Cancel", as is expected. This is because the box is asking for confirmation. If I right-click and choose "Properties", and then click [X], the file doesn't somehow get copied, pasted, deleted, or renamed. This is because that box is informational, and I would expect the [X] to function as a dismissal of the window.
Your analogy to the tax question is also a false one, because once again your example is one of a question being asked. No question is being asked here. A better analogy perhaps would be if you saw a window pop up on your voting terminal that said "Your vote was recorded as 'Yes' for repealing the new tax law. Click here to change your tax law vote or undo your vote," and you clicked [X] expecting, in some odd manner, that this would undo/remove your vote. I'd argue that if you clicked a button and a box appeared saying "Do you wish to vote 'Yes' on the new tax law?' and you clicked [X] that the expected behavior would be to cancel without casting any vote, but that would be expected as good UI design.
This is what baffles me about the uproar over this situation. It is misplaced. This window is not misleading if you simply read it. If you click the provided link, and there is literally no way to turn off the upgrade, that is a major issue worth arguing. If you don't believe "Install recommended updates automatically" should be a default setting for updates in Windows, I can understand arguing that fact also, of course. Personally, I think it's important that you take time to check your settings and know what your settings mean, but I can appreciate that many users either don't have the time or the knowledge level to make those sort of decisions responsibly.
But clicking an [X] on an informational box and expecting that to somehow reverse a setting behind the box? No, I don't understand that one.