The problem with Bbg is not that it needs a UI makeover. As mentioned below, we want function over form. There is a learning curve, but the payoff in the long run is huge. What Bloomberg desperately needs is UX consistency.
For example, my biggest and simplest gripe: all sorts of different charting commands have wildly different interactions. Different color palette selection. Incompatible axis selection. Sometimes you can't do either. It means that it's impossible to make something from ECWB look like one of your standard G templates, which sucks. Also, Launchpad needs much better integration. It's a mess.
The author of the article shows little understanding of the UX factors that trading users need and want. She seems to assume they take a perverse pride in a harsh colour scheme and terse keystrokes. In fact, traders don't want helpful popups and a mouse heavy point'n'click UI. They want the speed and accuracy of terse keystroke combos like BXSW to see a dealers swap rates.
Based on what I see in the images the only difference I see between the 'hideous' current state and the concept art is that one has a black background and the other has a white background.
So far as the keyboards go I can say I've seen the control room for a prototype antisatellite laser and it involves keyboards augmented with lots of extra buttons and what is so bad about that?
For example, my biggest and simplest gripe: all sorts of different charting commands have wildly different interactions. Different color palette selection. Incompatible axis selection. Sometimes you can't do either. It means that it's impossible to make something from ECWB look like one of your standard G templates, which sucks. Also, Launchpad needs much better integration. It's a mess.
TL;DR - The UI is fine. The UX needs consistency.
Source: hedge fund trader