The Mobile App Design Tail Wags the Desktop Software Design Dog 183
CowboyRobot writes "The metaphors and conventions of mobile apps on phones and tablets are now driving the design of desktop software. For example, dialog boxes in typical desktop software used to be complex, requiring lots of interaction. But these are now typically much simpler with far fewer options in a single pane. Drop-down menus are evolving, too. The former style of multiple cascading menus is being replaced. Drop-downs today have a smaller range of options (due to mobile screens being so small and the need to have the entries big enough that a finger touch can select it), and they never use the cascading menu. In Web-based apps, the mobile metaphors are finding greater traction as well. One need only look at the new Google Mail (GMail) interface and see how it's changed over the last year to view the effects of this new direction: All icons are monochrome, the number of buttons is very limited, and there's a More button that keeps the additional options off the main screen."
Dumbing down (Score:5, Insightful)
The dumbing down of computers continues. What else is new?
Re: (Score:2)
*puts down bottle* Unfortunately, I agree with you.
Explains a lot really. Some people can go through 12 years of school, and not learn a thing. Computers never had a chance.
Re: (Score:2)
Fortunately, there is still full-blown unix available, and it keeps getting better and cheaper.
Re: (Score:3)
For how long? We might have the source, but there's no guarantee that there will be hardware to run it on in the future. And Microsoft is doing everything in its power to make that happen.
Re: (Score:2)
I just don't see the general purpose computer going away any time soon.
But let's suppose it did... enterprise level hardware is still cheap by historical standards.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The problem comes not with signing, but with who controls the chain of trust. That is what you need to be concerned about.
If I hold the keys to the chain of trust, then it's my computer and secure. Anything else is unacceptable and an abuse of security policies for the sake of control.
Re: (Score:2)
If I hold the keys to the chain of trust, then it's my computer and secure. Anything else is unacceptable
So what do you plan to do once all mass-produced computers marketed for home use are "unacceptable"?
Re:Honestly.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Honestly I pity the world my kids would grow up in.
Seriously? You can walk into a store and buy a "phone" running Linux for under $200. It gets several hours of battery life, and has a better processor and more memory and storage than anything available on the desktop 15 years ago. The screen is on par with desktop standards of the same timeframe. If you handed me one in 1980, I would have believed you were a time traveler or an alien.
I can buy a $35 computer that far exceeds anything that a $3000 computer could do when I was a kid into computers in the 80s. The $35 computer is completely open, unlike anything from the 80s. Just like those computers, you can hook it up to your TV - but now your TV is a 55 inch 1080-line monster instead of a 20 inch 192-line lead and glass behemoth.
I have 5TB of redundant storage sitting in the basement - 15 years ago Microsoft was so proud of the ability to index a single TB that they launched Terraserver just to show off.
There will always be proprietary stuff out there, but I see no reason to pity my kids.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
If you handed me one in 1980, I would have believed you were a time traveler or an alien.
And you would have been right about the first thing.
I don't know the GP about the second thing, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids had magazines with programs on source code, and many of those kids probably learned something useful, besides just paying games.
Nowadays devices rarely come with any language interpreter at all (batch?).
Linux does, but you're probably an advanced user and already introduced in the CS universe.
I don't much see probable that a kid with a pc or mobile device steps on a programming language by chance.
Re: (Score:2)
Thinking about the computers on the 80s. Computers at that era booted right into BASIC interpreter.
Kids had magazines with programs on source code, and many of those kids probably learned something useful, besides just paying games.
True. Mind you for most of that decade you had to type those programs in yourself. They were simply printed listings. That meant you learned the fundamentals of BASIC, but they were never very sophisticated programs.
Still, happy days.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, let's not go overboard with the nostalgia. I don't think anybody learned much of anything by spending 3 days with MLX ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MLX_(software) [wikipedia.org] )
I don't remember the year or exact details, but I could swear that Star Micronics or Apple actually made a funky replacement printhead for their dot matrix printers that you could swap out with your real one and use as a crude scanner for barcodes. The idea was that magazines would print programs as scannable barcodes instead of as listin
Re: (Score:2)
It wasn't Apple, but there was a ribbon cartridge (Thunderscan) that one could swap out in order to use the ImageWriter II as a scanner.
On the Mac side, there was a scanner that one could use to obtain programs which were printed in a proprietary barcode/strip code format and were present in magazines for a few months until the publishers realized few people were buying the scanner.
Re: (Score:2)
I had one of those Thunderscans as a kid. We used it with our ImageWriter 1 and our Apple IIGS.
Re: (Score:3)
the generation that grew up learning on those relics you describe has far more intimate knowledge of how computers work and how to take advantage of their abilities due to how they work, not because they have a TB of ram and 16 execution units.
the software of my calculator (48gx) is far better than almost anything I've seen in modern computers.
Re: (Score:2)
Most of that generation grew up playing blocky versions of arcade games on the C64 or Oregon Trail at school on an Apple. The smart kids could peek and poke to their hearts content, but now those kids have things like Arduinos and Mindstorms and robotics competitions. The barrier to entry for programming is a web browser and a text editor, available everywhere, and it is a lot more powerful than printing your name in a goto loop at Radio Shack.
I have a 48gx. It's a nice calculator, and indeed the software i
Re: (Score:3)
today I'd rather have a less-efficient library written in some portable language.
I can date the point at which my enjoyment of programming started to fade as the point at which I was on a platform where I had to use libraries to make programs. The real fun for me is creating the whole thing, not being a client of libraries.
That would be about 1987. I only rediscovered the level of fun of early 80s programming when I got hold of Andre Le Moth's "Hydra" console, and made made games from the ground up, including the video driver.
Don't get me wrong, if I'm doing work, then of course I'll us
Re: (Score:2)
This seems to be getting better. In a lot of the world, stick PCs running ARM and Android are becoming popular. One can spend $50-60 and get one here, although in emerging markets they are likely far cheaper just due to economies of scale.
No, they won't run the latest Crysis, but for something for basic application use, they do the task at hand quite well, and because they have no moving parts, are pretty reliable, and with cloud backups, loss of data can be minimized.
Where I pity my kids won't be CPU arc
Re: (Score:2)
Just because it was open doesn't mean that cloning was legal. Neither Apple nor IBM approved cloning in any way, any more than a playwright who publishes a play approves unauthorized productions with no royalties.
Re:Honestly.... (Score:4, Insightful)
The IBM BIOS was published, providing detailed API information. Software was provided as source by both DEC and IBM. Unix (BSD and AT&T) was also supplied as source.
Software was not closed until Bill Gates closed it.
Re: (Score:2)
Software was not closed until Bill Gates closed it.
Multics [wikipedia.org] was closed from 1969 to 2007, beating ol' Billy G by over a decade.
Re: (Score:2)
Software was "open" as in visible, but for the most part you were not free to change and redistribute. At the high end, the specs were "open" for paying customers, but protected by nondisclosure agreements. Even when not, the schematics were subject to copyright - you couldn't go out and produce your own. It was open for hacking, but not really "free". A $40 CherryPy has more power, memory, storage, and connectivity then the highest-end servers of the 80s, and it is almost completely unencumbered by IP rest
Re: (Score:2)
That's exactly the same situation we were in when kids were playing games on Commodore 64s. For every geek peeking and poking the address space, there were hundreds of kids plugging in a cartridge and grabbing a joystick.
Re:Honestly.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Open source in its purest form is a patchwork of solutions that make sense locally, but may badly fit each other (or be redundant) in the big picture view - and this is natural. The wider world as we know it heavily relies upon redundancy and diversity.
Now, regarding your suggestion that money might have destroyed the originally technically sound open source approach. Dare I say, money is more likely to improve the situation than worsen it. Money is the ultimate metric by which we can measure whether some approach has practical merits. Without the monetary feedback, we are likely to be trapped in the infinite loop of designing "the right things" which will never be "right" in the real world. Things may get messy at times when we are stuck in the local minima of existing solutions, but in the long run I believe that money will sort it out... because better technology allows - ceteris paribus - to make more money
Re:Dumbing down (Score:5, Insightful)
I honestly don't see what's wrong with that, as long as it's not the dumbing down of *all* computers.
Car analogy time: I can't fucking stand manual transmission, but do I understand why people like it. They can have it. But the people who like manual transmission look down upon automatic transmission and complain "it's the dumbing down of cars."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Windows 8 hasn't gained traction yet. We'll see how that experiment turns out. On my Windows machines I'm sticking with 7 for the foreseeable future, and so are most people I know. Windows 8 is a weird Frankenstein's monster.
As for the Mac, I can pop into a full UNIX terminal if I feel inclined. :)
Re: (Score:2)
Ever used Windows 8? There's no way to switch back to the start menu without downloading third-party software
You do realize that most Linux distributions are full of third-party software that has to be downloaded, right? Many of the customization options are from those third-party components.
Seriously, I've never heard Linux users whine and cry so much about needing to customize a computer until Windows 8 came out. What changed? Did Windows 8 suddenly make you so lazy that you can't download and install something that gives you the options you desire?
Re: (Score:3)
I can't avoid the Modern interface. There are a rather large number of options in the OS that are only accessible via that UI and, conversely, many that cannot. The OS is schizophrenic and unable to function in one or the other exclusively.
The Start Menu was removed for the sole purpose of shoving a tablet-centric UI down users throats for the sake of their presence in the Tablet marke
Re: (Score:2)
There are a rather large number of options in the OS that are only accessible via that UI
Aside from (some parts of) Networking and the Lock Screen, I can't think of many settings that need to use the Modern UI interface to access.
The Start Menu was removed for the sole purpose of shoving a tablet-centric UI down users throats for the sake of their presence in the Tablet market. The entire Modern environment is centered around that (and to establish Microsoft's walled garden.)
TBH, I was originally somewhat excited to hear that MS was (finally) making their UI touch-friendly. Instead, we got a patchily-implemented touch-first UI. They threw out everything to force an Android/iOS-style mobile OS onto their users when there wasn't even any evidence that users actually wanted that. Instead, MS is trying to enter an already-crowded market with a
Re: (Score:2)
I think you still need Metro to shut down or restart. Unless you know keyboard shortcut, which novices do not. There is a shorthand way to get to control panel without using the "charms" bar, but again I don't think novices will stumble onto it. There's a lot of stuff that just keeps nudging you to the metro UI.
The problems aren't so much being touch-friendly. But that it is also mouse unfriendly in many ways (much more mouse movement than before). It is also something that appears to be designed for a
Re: (Score:2)
I think you still need Metro to shut down or restart.
I don't know of many people who just hate all of Metro/Modern. Most don't like the fact that the Start menu has been replaced, and that new apps take up the entire screen. I don't consider the charms/sidebar UI to be in the same problem domain (and typically, they are either helpful or useless, but don't get in the way much).
"Swiping" makes sense on a touch device or a touch pad even. It is absolutely stupid when using a keyboard and mouse though.
What in Windows 8 requires swiping? I've been using W8 exclusively for months, and other than being an easy way to close or rearrange Metro windows, I'm not sure where you need to sw
Re: (Score:2)
Swiping is for closing metro apps or for switching between them. Maybe it's not used everywhere, but those are useful operations and swiping is not intuitive.
Re: (Score:2)
Most don't like the fact that the Start menu has been replaced
It is almost an improvement over the start menu. I found the start menu too small in Vista/7 once I had 10+ applications installed. A pop-up launcher (if the Modern UI launcher opened in a pop-up over the current app/desktop, for example) would actually be an improvement, in my opinion. As it is, running full-screen on my 27" monitor is rather wasteful and used to break my focus before I got used to it.
new apps take up the entire screen
This is another thing that makes sense on a tablet or notebook screen, but is just wasteful on a large des
Re: (Score:2)
The problems aren't so much being touch-friendly. But that it is also mouse unfriendly in many ways
That's exactly what I mean by "touch-first". Touch interaction is (supposed to be) the primary interaction method for Modern UI, and that is, if not a major problem, an annoyance if you have no inclination or ability (no touchscreen) to use that input method.
Re: (Score:2)
The choices are slim. All the decent utilities to fix the Windows 8 problems cost money. The free ones that I've looked at have a variety of problems.
Although there is a workaround to boot straight to desktop by setting up a service; ugly but not too terrible. No other workarounds I've found for the remaining warts.
Re: (Score:2)
All the decent utilities to fix the Windows 8 problems cost money.
So does Windows 8 itself.
The free ones that I've looked at have a variety of problems.
What problems come with the free one "wipe the fscker and install Xubuntu"?
Re:Dumbing down (Score:5, Interesting)
> What changed?
Despair at seeing Linux's most influential distro doing its best to ruin itself as badly as Windows 8 has.
We naively thought Linux was an island of sanity, and believed abominations like Unity were something that only happened to Windows people.
Ubuntu scared the shit out of all of us by making it clear that Linux isn't immune to the insanity propagated by those who think crippling desktop apps to the limited functionality of phone apps is a *good* idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Compare though to Mac OS X. It hasn't been dumbed down in that way, clearly Microsoft is copying someone else. Yes, there's a feature in Mac OS to bring up gigantic icons to click on to start apps, but it is not there by default and not shoved in your face as the only option. Mac OS also does not send you to the Apple store all the time, and you can use the application that are preinstalled without needing an Apple ID.
Windows 8 really is anomalous. Nothing else really seems to be naively assuming that a
Re: (Score:2)
Yet now, how many newer Automatic cars are adding tiptronic, or sports shift? - Creating some bastardised hybrid of Auto and Manual that just feels and responds "wrong"
Re: (Score:2)
This is the best car analogy I've ever seen here. Those tiptronic things are just like Windows 8. Trying to be two things and being bad at both instead of just focusing on one thing and being really good.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple does get flak for their UI though. From the brushed metal everywhere to the to the c
Re: (Score:2)
If you've never driven anywhere but on a level plain, you might not appreciate the difference.
Let me put this another way: You do NOT want to drive Hwy 321 anywhere north/east of Elizabethton, TN during the winter using anything other than a stick. Unless you like driving at 5-10 MPH the whole way, or have a fondness for vertical travel.
And it's not that much better in summer.
Re: (Score:2)
I live in Southern Ontario, which is generally flat as a board.
I also commute on the busiest highway in North America, which is stop-go during rush hour and packed 18-wheelers. That, and my neighbourhood has notoriously awful stoplights and drivers of a certain unrefined skill set.
So ya, automatic works for me.
Re:Dumbing down (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dumbing down (Score:5, Insightful)
The dumbing down of computers continues. What else is new?
I would not call it dumbing down when the fact is that "the dumb" expect an intuitiveness that is just NOT here yet. A trend started by toolbars decades ago ASSUMES previous familiarity. If we learned anything from the backslash caused back in Office 2003 when the file menu went away, it was that it's hard to explain to someone over the phone what to click on when even your description of the icon can fall flat or cause ambiguity in what the user thinks you're suggesting.
Today, smartphone feature reduction (more like forced simplification) has bled into webmail GUIs. For the adults I tutor one on one, I chose setting them up with Yahoo over Gmail due to richer, written interfaces. I also chose Firefox over Chrome due to the same, back before FF killed the menu in a copy-cat move that would undo this very effort. Imagine all the complaints I got from 3 of these students over 50+ years old when their Yahoo text labels went away last month. They instead got arrows, gear icons, disappearing options (dynamic) and paper clips where they expect "Reply", "Delete", "Attach". Those icons were always there, but they never cared to notice, kinda like people spend years clicking on "Edit \ Copy" without noticing what the Control - C and its icon are supposed to help with. The masses do not pay attention even when there's no pressure, and they did not take being forced to adapt very well. The ones who do are already computer savvy.
Even though the buttons are far fewer, tablets are even worse. My mother unlearned how to Attach a file a dozen times. Finally, she learned the tablet GUI provides fewer confusion, but she's still greatly confused and is afraid of exploring what she thinks is a cryptic GUI and invisible "if you see nothing helpful, you're supposed to hold your finger down for the menu the programmer hid for that option". Android's interface is terrible for teaching an older person with limited memory AND time --I've had limited exposure to iPhones but find them friendlier and more likely to use words. See that gear icon over there [settings]? See that three line icon over here [menu]? See that bifurcating icon over here [share]? See that magnifying glass [search], not to be confused with this magnifying glass with a PLUS in it [zoom]? See those overlapping squares [windows]? Heck, I new it was trouble when I found it impossible to have them master multiple windows, let alone summoning and handling multiple tabs (plus icon in one browser, or square tabby thing in IE, or File \ New Tab in another)
Older people tend to
1) refuse to read our notes, books or sign up for classes in a real school with real homework. Too busy with fun and an "I need it now" attitude
2) tablets have no mouseover help labels
3) refuse to think through "geeky" words when 95% of the sentence makes sense.
With things my mother enjoys on facebook, she constantly uses the hardcover dictionary to confirm spelling and meanings. The second there's a geeky word, she completely locks up and wants a quick way out. Dumbing down provides such a way, but becomes a trap destined to be understood only by the initiated, which are a much younger crowd that has no problem or shame in asking for help.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
My Motorola Atrix running Android 2.3 had a lot of text labels throughout its UI. I found it much more discoverable than iOS applications on my iPad, due to the greater use of text and the fixed location of the menu, search and back buttons.
I've got a Galaxy Note 2 now. It's a superb phone, much better than the Atrix overall, but I see what you mean about text labels getting replaced with cryptic icons. I'm inclined to agree that it makes the interface a lot less discoverable.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Now you make me feel bad that us old-fucks invented the Internet and solid-state devices for you ungrateful punks.
MY 80 year-old mom has no problem with her devices. Maybe YOUR mom is just stupid.
Now excuse this 52 year-old sysadmin as I get a batch of new Windows 8 tablets joined to the domain and VPN so I can send them off to China with our aerospace engineers.
Re: (Score:2)
This is not dumbing down, this is finally applying basic usability theory. Designers should be aware of the fact that nobody reads dialog boxes for example, and take care with their design to not use them, and where they do, to keep it short and to the point.
Using black and white instead of colour icons? Yay, finally colour-blind people will find things easier to use.
Not everyone needs to access every function all the time. A good designer will anticipate what the common functions are and make it really ea
Re: (Score:2)
The slashdot crowd would have thought the TV was dumbed down when it changed from a rotary frequency dial to discrete channel buttons.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Those are a third generation of TVs. But I haven't seen any yet that don't have any channel change controls on the TV. They tend to be P +/- and they tend to be under a hidden flap. But they are for emergencies only. And anyway, most channel selection these days is done via a set-top-box.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yep... first it was our PC games' interfaces getting dumbed down due to console cross-development, and now the same thing is happening for regular applications. :(
History (Score:5, Insightful)
So first people start realizing that the way menus and such are handled on the desktop did not work well in the touch screen or mobile space, so designers learned that lesson and developed more appropriate layouts.
Now we have a new batch of designers that is making the same mistake, taking the mobile layouts and trying to use them on a desktop where they do not make much sense.
Though really, it is probably just the old 'I learned to do X in environment Y and now I want to do X everywhere because Y rocked!' thing.
Re:History (Score:5, Insightful)
There might be that. Or there might be laziness. "OK, got the UI working for compact touchscreen devices. Now to design a completely different UI for a non-touchscreen large-format device with mouse and keyboard. Screw it. I'll just upscale the first UI. It'll work fine, and I just want to check this off and maybe go home on time for a change."
In a developer, laziness is next to godliness, in that it's simply another synonym for "efficient". The fact that a tablet UI is kinda yucky on a desktop system doesn't take away from the fact that it basically works. "Good enough".
Re: (Score:2)
designer=costs manager
lazy=doesn't want to pay
Re: (Score:3)
I just did somethign similar. I was writing a karoke jukebox client/server system in my own time, and decided that:
1) Tablets woud be a convenient (and cool) client interface, and
2) I suck at UI aesthetics.
Using the jQuery Mobile library was a no brainer and all of the aesthetics were done for me. It looks and works great on a tablet/smartphone, and is still perfectly usable on a PC. I could make the PC interface richer and more information dense, but there is little incentive.
Re: (Score:3)
While something tells me you are very happy with this sort of attitude, it's pretty much the one thing that sets mediocre and greatness apart. I guess you'll always be "good enough", which is fine if you don't ever want to be better. I want to be better.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't disagree, but it's not the developer's role.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I hope you're not trusting management in this. As pointed out upthread, "good enough" is also "lower-cost" and "quicker". Checking off a feature in the development schedule for 0 cost and 0 time practically makes project managers orgasm, so don't expect much support for your "handcrafted desktop UI" (at the cost of at least 40 hours of effort and a week on the schedule).
In this way, "good enough" is the conspiracy between overworked developer and the overreaching manager.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If only we could put Symbian on the desktop, we could have the same UI work on a 50 inch monitor as well as a 1 inch monitor!
Re:History (Score:4, Insightful)
The trend of simplification on the desktop started before mobile was driving it. I think there is a convergence in that some things that usability studies and other factors were driving in general happened to also mesh very well with what fits on mobile device and works without a multibutton mouse; there is some analogy, I think, to how SQL and the relational model were motivated by theoretical concerns but really took off because they also happened to be convenient to implement in a performant way on disk-based storage and were introduced as disk-based storage was becoming popular.
Re:History (Score:4, Insightful)
I think this is an important point. I have used "touch" aka tablet friendly graphics software for over a decade and the tablet friendly UI's were all amazingly efficient UIs with a mouse and keyboard. People knock touch UIs as "dumbing down" UIs. But they said the exact same thing about GUIs *period*. You could say "dumbing down" or done well you could call it "removing excessive complexity". I could create the most cluttered UI imaginable just covered in buttons without any hierarchy. It would be extremely fast if you memorized where everything was. But a context menu would probably be better.
Re: (Score:2)
In short, where there are few options, icons are fine. Where there are many, you need a hierarchical approach so options are presented in context. Icons do not do that well. It is fine for people
Re: (Score:2)
Touch != touch (Score:2)
I have used "touch" aka tablet friendly graphics software for over a decade and the tablet friendly UI's were all amazingly efficient UIs with a mouse and keyboard.
The stylus you were using a decade ago can touch a far smaller area with far greater precision than a finger.
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting you say that, but there's at least one area where the opposite was true to success: pie menus. With mice, a pie menu isn't as useful precisely because desktops have so many options and layered pie menus can quickly become confusing. Meanwhile, pie menus are a great fit on a touch screen with only a few options and layers (ju
Re: (Score:3)
I'm just doing what my stupid customers and managers are telling me to do.
I don't want to call them stupid to their faces. (that didn't work out so well 15 years ago when we went through this exercise before). . .
You only have to look at... (Score:5, Insightful)
Rather than doing the sane thing and making different views/OSes for phones, tablets, laptops with small screens and full-sized computers, we've come to where we try a "one size fits all" method that doesn't work. It used to be that we had desktop-style OSes, sites and applications on smaller devices, now we have it backwards.
Seriously, I've got a 24 inch screen, I don't need huge boxes for my applications like I might need on my tablet.
and apps running full screen does not work that we (Score:3)
and apps running full screen does not work that well on a 24 inch screen or for desktop work flows.
Re: (Score:2)
The apps with Windows 8 are also so badly designed. Given that they often look so similar I suspect this awfulness is part of the design standard.
Ie, Weather opens up full screen and at least half of the space is unused except for the background. And yet you can side-scroll through 2 more full pages worth. Which includes an advertisement! I pull up Bing and a search brings up 11 results all with big boxes and large fonts, and then you side scroll too see more responses. Ok, web page of Bing only has
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, it's not only Windows 8. In fact, they weren't even first. OS X / iOS has been trying to mate over the past several years with varying degrees of success. Unfortunately, Apple seems Hell bent on destroying the concept of the file as data and instead trying to make the app the center of the user universe. Completely opposite of the initial UNIX approach but I guess files and file systems have always been a big conceptual and practical problem for the great unwashed.
I weep for our collective loss. No
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've got a 20 inch screen and a 24 inch screen connected to my imac.I tell myself I like to spread out, but I really use it for watching hidef video while programming or whatnot. The key is that I'm doing two things at once, even if one of those things is largely passive.
Apple's "Full Screen mode" turns off one of my screens (and decorates it with some sort of neutral pattern). It's very annoying. Yesterday I was in the library, consulting a bevy of books and annotating them for future reference. It would
Windows 8 is a half-baked creature (Score:5, Interesting)
To me the UI feels 1/2 done, like they plopped a mobile UI on mouse and keyboard driven UI and called it a day. Given the tons of code in Windows you think they could add in a few if/else blocks to check which platform you are on and adjust the UI a bit to the platform. The Vista/Win8 comparisons are rather apt, IMO.
worried (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
You have good reason to worry. Intel is exiting [slashdot.org] the motherboard market. That says something. Something worrisome. Other people say it's because Taiwan does it just as good now, so Intel doesn't have to care anymore, but it's more ominous than that. Google dropped Google Desktop Search and Sidebar when Microsoft created their own versions. Microsoft discontinued their own sidebar a little while later and let's face it, their search is STILL unreliable. Will we see the same series of events with mother
that's because iOS is equated with value itself. (Score:3)
look at the amount of advertising for products completely unrelated to computing (mobile or otherwise) which choose to position the product being sold within the frame of an iPhone. it's a nearly ubiquitous advertising technique. this, imo, indicates that the iPhone has become popularly synonymous with "value". a few years ago this role was filled by laptops: if i was selling diapers, i'd show a smart-looking housewife viewing my product on a laptop. now it's iPhones. so what's happening is that UI designers are trying to convince you that their UI has Value by making it invoke iOS. my $0.02.
Thank God. (Score:5, Interesting)
UX designers and experts have been clamouring for simplification for years, but clients refused to change until everyone started asking "why doesn't this work on my phone/tablet".
Perfect example:
Cascading drop menus that require click+hold, or click+hover to keep open. These are almost impossible to keep open multiple levels deep with anything other than a keyboard or mouse. Touchpads, thinkpad nipples, trackballs, all require precise movements, and even a mouse is less than ideal. But we tolerate it because that's what we're used to. Since click+hold, or click+hover doesn't make sense on a touch device, people are finally beginning to accept UX recommendations that it's not a good menu behavior to use.
Depth of functionality != Complexity. Watch this video for more understanding [penny-arcade.com]. It describes video game design, but the same idea applies to any user interface.
Re: (Score:2)
This is because UX is a bollocks field that has nothing to do with HMI and HCI.
Ironically this is the perfect example.
In a desktop interface if you want to have multiple levels of menus to keep a menu system uncluttered, you did the cascading thing you mentioned.
In a mobile interface, to do the same thing you have to have separately
Re: (Score:2)
It's probably a good idea to watch that Penny Arcade link the GP gave.
Re: (Score:2)
A longer list of options != a better list of options.
Getting rid of cascading drop menus forces you to rethink how setup your menu system and options to begin with. You can have the same level of depth (variation of tasks and user goals) without overwhelming the user with complexity (large flat list of options).
There are other ways to structure information besides a simple tree-based list.
Re: (Score:2)
And I wasn't suggesting the presentation format itself is good or an example of what to do. The content and message is good and describes complexity (bad) vs. depth (good) which is important for any software meant for interaction with humans. Depth empowers the user, whereas complexity overwhelms.
Pleasure UX (Score:2)
someone please explain... (Score:2)
...the discrepancy here; after all, all those developing FOR mobile
surely aren't doing this development ON mobile.
So therefore -- does the answer to this dilemma in essence hilight
the end of the GENERAL PURPOSE computer?
Just asking.
Re: (Score:2)
So therefore -- does the answer to this dilemma in essence hilight
the end of the GENERAL PURPOSE computer?
Hopefully. Donald Norman predicted it's demise 15 years ago in The Invisible Computer. So far, so good.
What I hate about drop-down menus (Score:2)
Apple reversed the mouse wheel because of touch (Score:2)
The lastes OS/X has reversed mouse wheel direction. This is so that the action of pushing with your finger has a consistent effect on the screen between touch and mouse environments. It also has the effect of reversing the selection order of weapons and items in games.
DogTail (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Wrong thread again, twinkie.
I know the Slashdot interface is particularly complex, but we're supposed to be the top of the heap.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In a newer project used Bootstrap as its' base...
Re: (Score:2)
> The Ribbon has been my UI experience from Hell, and now I see what so many
> long-time users hate about UI change: if any particular UI (I suppose I should
> qualify that as "adequately functional") has been assimilated into their work
> habits, do NOT mess with that, and waste their productive time with change,
> unless a Hell of a case can be made for quantum leaps in productivity,
> and only with reasonable effort in a reasonable amount of time - however the
> vict... er, user defines th