Is the problem Micro$oft or its customers?

[Richard Gaskin]

I've been updating WebMerge to take advantage of Rev 2.5's improved 
support for native XP appearances -- so far not bad:
<http://www.fourthworld.com/wincolors.jpg>

As you can see in that image, WebMerge's background color is the same as 
XP's background for the Display control panel and other UIs where a tab 
control is behind most of the other controls.

While it looks OK to me, my beta testing customers have submitted 
reports saying the UI is "too light"; the previous version of WM used 
the Win95 appearance with its dark, dank gray.

So I have three ways to handle these reports:

a) Tell them it's conformant with Micro$oft's published spec and so they 
need to get used to it, possibly providing an email address for 
Micro$oft's design team so they can complain directly to the source.

b) Ignore Micro$oft's XP Visual Design Guidelines and use their darker 
background color (the tan behind the tab) for the tab control itself.

c) Use the Gaslight method:  Tell 'em it's actually the same but their 
vision has changed. ;)


I've been doing a), but as more reports come in I'm considering the 
possibility that the enormously-well-funded-yet-still-tasteless UI team 
at Micro$oft may have gotten it wrong; maybe that color is indeed too light.

So do I conform to Micro$oft and face the wrath of customers, or conform 
to the customers and face the wrath of reviewers?

-- 
  Richard Gaskin
  Fourth World Media Corporation
  Developer of WebMerge: Publish any database on any Web site
  ___________________________________________________________
  Ambassador at FourthWorld.com       http://www.FourthWorld.com