Live data from Hacker News

Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

twitter.com

121–130 of 388 posts

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh. I'd say the examples are perfectly good and on-point. While dealing with autoexec.bat and random BSODs wasn't fun, it's entirely orthogonal to the fact that a DOS-era POS still offers orders of magnitude better UX than current-era browser POSes, or than most web apps for that matter. It also doesn't change the fact that Google Maps is very bad at being a map . It's entire UI flow is oriented for giving turn-by-t…

> It also doesn't change the fact that Google Maps is very bad at being a map. It's entire UI flow is oriented for giving turn-by-turn directions for people who know where they are and where they are going; As it turns out, that is probably the most popular use case for maps in the world. Note also that for most smartphone users of Google Maps the use-case is actually much broader than that. The UI flow also totally…

I think you’re measuring use-cases by volume (i.e. Monthly Active Users) instead of by mass (i.e. number of man-hours spent engaged with the app’s UI by those users.)

Certainly, a lot of people use Google Maps for turn-by-turn directions. This means that they interact with the actual UI and visible map tiles once, at the beginning of the trip; and then from there on are given timely voice directions every few minutes, which they can maybe contextualize by looking at the map on the screen. Even if you count the time they spend hearing those directions as time spent “interacting with the UI” of Google Maps, it adds up to fewer man-hours than you’d think.

Meanwhile, I believe that there are a much larger number of collective man-hours spent staring at the Google Maps UI—actually poking and prodding at it—by pedestrians navigating unfamiliar cities, or unfamiliar places in their city. Tourists, people with new jobs, people told to meet their friends for dinner somewhere; etc.

And the Google Maps UI (especially the map tiles themselves) is horrible for pedestrians. Half the time you can’t even figure out the name of the road/street you’re standing on; names of arterial roads (like main streets that happen to also be technically highways) only show up at low zoom levels, while names of small streets barely show up at the highest zoom level. And asking Maps to give you a pedestrian or public-transit route to a particular place doesn’t fix this, because GMaps just doesn’t understand what can or cannot be walked through. It thinks public parks are solid obstacles (no roads!) while happily routing you along maintenance paths for subway systems, rail lines, and even airfields. (One time it guided me to walk down the side of an above-grade freeway, outside the concrete side-barriers, squeezing between the barriers and a forest.) And, of course, it still assumes the “entrances” to an address are the car entrances—so, for example, it routes pedestrians to the back alleys behind apartment buildings (because that’s more often where the parking-garage entrance is) rather than the front, where the door is. I don’t live here, Google; I can’t even get into the garage!

The thing is, these are such distinct workflows that there’s no reason for Google Maps to be optimizing for one use-case over the other in the first place. It’s immediately apparent which one you’re attempting by your actions upon opening the app; so why not just offer one experience (and set of map tiles) for people attempting car navigation, and a different experience (and set of map tiles) for people attempting pedestrian wayfinding?

Or, someone could just come out with a wayfinding app for pedestrians that does its own map rendering. There’s already a Transit app with a UI (and map tiles) optimized for transit-takers; why not a Walkthere app with a UI (and map tiles) optimized for pedestrians? :)

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#122

This post again with its ridiculous ranting examples. "This text searching program that searches text against text is way faster and simpler than a fully rendered, interactive map of the entire world with accurate roads and precision at the foot / meter level." No. Shit, really? Get out of town. Yes, some very popular apps have bad UX. But some apps have incredible UX. Cherry picking the bad ones while ignoring the g…

Huh. I'd say the examples are perfectly good and on-point. While dealing with autoexec.bat and random BSODs wasn't fun, it's entirely orthogonal to the fact that a DOS-era POS still offers orders of magnitude better UX than current-era browser POSes, or than most web apps for that matter. It also doesn't change the fact that Google Maps is very bad at being a map . It's entire UI flow is oriented for giving turn-by-t…

> That I don't get. Is it "elitist" now to point out that the (tech) "elite" can actually handle all this bullshit

It's easy to critique and complain, while at the same time doing it puts someone in a position of superiority. Saying "all the effort and knowledge out there is bullshit because my 1983 terminal searched text faster", in a way says that the person writing this knows better, and thus is elite. OP says it's disguised as disappointment, which I agree, because the author describes (and disguises) the situation from a frustration point-of-view.

But I also think that elitism can be traded with snobbery in this case.

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#123
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But I also don't need to spend an entire weekend setting up a PC and a printer for my mom anymore either. You still have to waste a lot of time doing this crap. Last time I set up a printer for my mom, it was a PITA: I had to download drivers, install some giant pile of crap software, go through a bunch of screens of garbage, etc. Needless to say, her computer runs Windows 10. By contrast, when I wanted to print to…

Personally I would recommend Brother every time for a printer. They're not fancy but they are well built and don't require you to install a software suite. Roommate and I are still using the same laser printer from college. It's not wireless but if we really wanted to we could attach a pi and setup a printer pool but for now a long cable serves us just fine for the few times we need to print.

+1 on Brother printers. I'm on my second Brother laser printer and It Just Works. I also have a Canon Ink Jet that is mostly harmless. My sister's HP printer, however...

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#124
post #62

This post again with its ridiculous ranting examples. "This text searching program that searches text against text is way faster and simpler than a fully rendered, interactive map of the entire world with accurate roads and precision at the foot / meter level." No. Shit, really? Get out of town. Yes, some very popular apps have bad UX. But some apps have incredible UX. Cherry picking the bad ones while ignoring the g…

>But I also don't need to spend an entire weekend setting up a PC and a printer for my mom anymore either. You still have to waste a lot of time doing this crap. Last time I set up a printer for my mom, it was a PITA: I had to download drivers, install some giant pile of crap software, go through a bunch of screens of garbage, etc. Needless to say, her computer runs Windows 10. By contrast, when I wanted to print to…

Today basically every piece of external hardware is compatible with pretty much every computer. Better than that, they are plug and play for the most part. Thanks for reminding me to properly appreciate this.

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#126
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last printer I had to configure on my Linux machine required finding a downloading a hidden mystery bash script from the manufacturer's website and running it with root permissions. Not exactly "plug and play" or "safe"

Then you got the wrong printer. Some manufacturers do a good job of supporting Linux (HP is probably the best actually; their drivers all ship standard in most distros), others don't bother.

There are absolutely others that bother, for example Brother: https://support.brother.com/g/s/id/linux/en/faq_prn.html?c=u...

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#128
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But I also don't need to spend an entire weekend setting up a PC and a printer for my mom anymore either. You still have to waste a lot of time doing this crap. Last time I set up a printer for my mom, it was a PITA: I had to download drivers, install some giant pile of crap software, go through a bunch of screens of garbage, etc. Needless to say, her computer runs Windows 10. By contrast, when I wanted to print to…

Personally I would recommend Brother every time for a printer. They're not fancy but they are well built and don't require you to install a software suite. Roommate and I are still using the same laser printer from college. It's not wireless but if we really wanted to we could attach a pi and setup a printer pool but for now a long cable serves us just fine for the few times we need to print.

I bought a cheap (<100euro) wifi-enabled black and white Brother laser printer a year ago and it works great.

Re: Almost everything on computers is perceptually slower than it was in 1983 (2017)

#129
I have a lot of sympathy for this article.

(And all the comments about how much faster computers are today: I interpreted the article to be talking about the ease of UI, in other words how fast the interface lets you do things, not how fast the computer does things.)

I have a private Rails app I've used as a freelancer for 7-8 years for time tracking, invoicing, expenses, and financial reports, and I've tried to make it very keyboard-focused, so that I can enter info without clicking around. I've always wanted to polish it enough to share and charge money for, and I've thought a nice niche would be to double down on the "keyboard productivity" theme. But making that work well in a browser is tricky.

Do you mostly rely on browser-native functionality for keyboard nav/input? That's how it is today. It's fine for me, but it's not really "enough" I think. There are lots of other navigation moves I wish had keyboard shortcuts. But a lot of taste is required here. Usually when people override browser behavior it makes things worse (e.g. scrolling). But there are still things that would be actual improvements.

So a couple years ago I rewrote the Invoices section in React+Redux, hoping that would make it easier to do some custom UI behavior. It made a couple small things better, but it's a lot more code, and it breaks some things the browser used to give me for free. For example if you add a new invoice and see it at the bottom of the list, then you click to a non-React part of the site, then click Back, the new invoice disappears from the list! I'm not even sure how to fix that, unless I want to add a spinner and Ajax call on page load. (Right now I pass the initial state as JSON in the rendered HTML.) Maybe I could use local storage, but then somehow when you click Back I have to decide whether to trust local storage or make an Ajax call. . . .

Anyway, rather than complaining about the article, I'd be more interested in a conversation about how to build webapps with a keyboard focus, so that you can complete entire tasks without touching the mouse. What native browser features would you leverage? What frontend tech would help you? Can you imagine "standard" patterns you could encode in a JS lib, both for DRY code and for a more predictable UI? A "Bootstrap for keyboard-first webapps" would be really cool. In fact Bootstrap already does a lot for accessibility.

Post reply on HN