Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We use too many damn modals (2018)

modalzmodalzmodalz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 127 posts

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#31

Post by reaperducer »

x32n23nr wrote: post #3

Modals are basically the fancy clone of old school javascript's alert(), and while everyone would rightfully be annoyed being "alerted" needlessly, designers have convinced themselves that it's fine to show modals frequently? Edit: Claiming it's only designers' fault, or generalizing that all designers do that, is obviously wrong. I did not mean that. What I meant to convey (partially failed) is that examples propaga…

designers have convinced themselves that it's fine to show modals frequently?

Not good designers. Bad middle-managers, who only know how to say, "Make it a pop-up!" and nothing else.

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#32

Post by reaperducer »

seventh-chord wrote: post #18
pvg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modal dialogs are a lot older than alert(). alert() is an instance of a modal dialog, not the other way round.

My impression from seeing old windows version (never having used anything older than vista) was that in general using an extra window instead of a separate pane inside the window was more common. As far as I can tell, the old windows explorer would pop open a new window for each opened folder. Now it seems like most programs are run in half/full-screen; They arent really treated as windows. IDEs have their own window…

There were modals in Ashton-Tate's Framework back in 1984.

I think even GEOS had them.

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#33

Post by reaperducer »

w_for_wumbo wrote: post #13

My biggest issue with modals, is that they never seem to be tested with mobile devices in mind. So when I'm on my phone, the ability to close it is often off the screen. The only choice is to leave the website at that point.

My biggest issue with modals, is that they never seem to be tested with mobile devices in mind

I feel your pain.

The web sites I maintain have at least 70% mobile users. But the managers (and designers!) only see them on giant-screen desktops, and only care what it looks like in-house, not to the customers.

I'm tired of constantly telling layers of bosses that what they want won't work on mobile, which is where their customers are.

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#34

Post by tasty_freeze »

systemvoltage wrote: post #2

I agree about modals. But seems like the same points can be made about the website's design that trying to teach others about modals, have you considered using plain text or a more readable website to convey your point across without resorting to 1-bit retro decoration? Edit: 1 bit lol

If my obese doctor tells me I need to lose weight, I have two choices. Either I can weigh his advice, or I can ignore him and cluck that his comment is really rich considering he is overweight himself.

I think the first option is helpful; the second option is boringly obvious and not helpful.

As for the style, I found it to be entertaining and helped make a possibly dry topic seem a little less like a lecture and more like friendly advice.

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#35

Post by WorldMaker »

triyambakam wrote: post #30

Is this website considered "brutalist"?

In the web sense of "true to web form" brutalist? Not really, for instance the tables are not made to look like TABLEs and are in fact ULs and such. This design aesthetic might better be described as "(Mac) Classical". (Brutalist isn't only about minimalism.)

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#36

Post by seph-reed »

Modals are a good way to show complex content without throwing away your current render. Whatever you were doing before the modal came up, you can go straight back to that. No re-draws, no scrolling back to the place you were at.

Ofc we've all seen them done terribly.

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#37

Post by runawaybottle »

recursivedoubts wrote: post #24

Let me see if I can articulate this well: The problem problem with modals in a web page context is that they go against the statelessness of the html request/response model. They end up building up a lot of local state in the client, both model state as well as UI state, that eventually need to be reconciled with the server. If the user closes the modal, is the data saved for later? Does the form reset? Does the serv…

I’ll try to condense it more. If you play a video game and a modal pops up, it takes you out of the experience. It’s the same as (hypothetically) me having to go into my HN profile to find a list of comments I upvoted to then go ahead and downvote (versus just having the downvote button next to the post).

Can’t teach this stuff, you basically need to be confronted by tons of bad UI in software, games, physical printed forms, processes, until you get a good sense of taste.

I can’t teach HN devs that my thumb covers both the upvote and downvote button on mobile. Can’t teach it.

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#38

Post by pvg »

seventh-chord wrote: post #18
pvg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modal dialogs are a lot older than alert(). alert() is an instance of a modal dialog, not the other way round.

My impression from seeing old windows version (never having used anything older than vista) was that in general using an extra window instead of a separate pane inside the window was more common. As far as I can tell, the old windows explorer would pop open a new window for each opened folder. Now it seems like most programs are run in half/full-screen; They arent really treated as windows. IDEs have their own window…

What I was getting at is that the important thing is the concept (which is about as old as GUIs), the other stuff is implementation detail. The 'modal' part of the a modal dialog is that it takes you out of the 'modeless' interaction state where you can take one of the many UI actions available to you to a state (mode!) where you can do very few things and nothing else.

Making GUIs less modal is a similarly ancient UI design holy grail. Applications are modes hence everything from OpenDoc to the just-announced App Clips. A familiar clunky modern mode is 'native' apps vs 'apps' in browsers - a big chunk of technologies many programmers work with today are directly or indirectly related to mitigating its effects.

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#39

Post by systemvoltage »

tasty_freeze wrote: post #34
systemvoltage wrote: post #2

I agree about modals. But seems like the same points can be made about the website's design that trying to teach others about modals, have you considered using plain text or a more readable website to convey your point across without resorting to 1-bit retro decoration? Edit: 1 bit lol

If my obese doctor tells me I need to lose weight, I have two choices. Either I can weigh his advice, or I can ignore him and cluck that his comment is really rich considering he is overweight himself. I think the first option is helpful; the second option is boringly obvious and not helpful. As for the style, I found it to be entertaining and helped make a possibly dry topic seem a little less like a lecture and mor…

That's a bad analogy. The reason why you trust your obese doctor for weight loss advice is not because their body shape, but because of the credentials (Doctor).

Replace a doctor with a random stranger (which is what this website is, I don't know the person giving advice about the modals) on the street who is obese and tries to tell you with authoritative voice - "Hey! Listen, you're fat and this is how to lose weight!".

That's more accurate. I can agree with you about the entertainment value, I personally don't see it but if someone is entertained by it, good.

Re: We use too many damn modals (2018)

#40

Post by justanotherc »

kinkrtyavimoodh wrote: post #14
ameyv wrote: post #4

I don't want to complain, website is harder to read with all that 8 bitsh font type...Maybe normal post with one example for each idea would be good enough.

The irony of a website with a deliberately terrible and gimmicky UI complaining about a functional UI model that has worked for decades.

That's kind of what I thought too. Our app is very Modal heavy (including modal inception), but I can't think of any case where the suggested alternatives would actually be better. And that's backed up by the fact that our users regularly tell us how easy and awesome it is to navigate through it.
Post reply on HN