41–50 of 127 posts
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 printe…
Imagine you're playing a game and you click "Options" and a modal window pops up with the options you can tweak. Or an endless image gallery where clicking an image enlarges it inside a modal that you can dismiss to resume scrolling without losing your place.
It didn't wrongfully force you out of experience, it's what you wanted.
Seems like we're talking about getting in the way of users where crappy modals are just one way of doing that. Navigating to a new page seems even more jarring in TFA examples.
Also, hilariously this website uncovers a bug in Safari where the cursor doesn't reset once you leave the page bounds, so I have a huge pixellated cursor hanging around until I click somewhere else :P
The list of reasons why modals are bad are all very subjective. A little more explanation would have helped make the case that modals are bad. Not to mention that what should be a list is displayed as a table (－‸ლ)
I’ll try to fill that gap.
Modals switch the application normal mode to get your attention. So they interrupt your “flow”.
Most of the reasons to use them could be resolved by other means, that are better in terms of UX but requires more work in both design and implementation:
- Confirmation modals can be substituted with auto-save, undo, and restore, but is more complex to implement.
- Modals to show more info can be resolved with progressive disclosure or by improving the information architecture.
However, like with many design choices there are cases where modals are a good option. For example, for certain confirmations and navigation the advantage of the modal is that the backdrop makes clear where do you go after dismissing the modal (bottom sheets in mobile are a example).
Another reason why modals get a bad rep is that they have all sorts of implementation issues in web, and in the desktop the mode change for a window is not prominent (macOS solves that with sheets, but Windows still has that problem)
The list of reasons why modals are bad are all very subjective. A little more explanation would have helped make the case that modals are bad. Not to mention that what should be a list is displayed as a table (－‸ლ)
I agree, the site visuals and short messages doesn’t explain well why they are bad. I’ll try to fill that gap. Modals switch the application normal mode to get your attention. So they interrupt your “flow”. Most of the reasons to use them could be resolved by other means, that are better in terms of UX but requires more work in both design and implementation: - Confirmation modals can be substituted with auto-save, u…
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
To anyone who's familiar with the topic it's immediately clear from the copy that the author understands it.
Considering that the target audience is other designers, why does the presentation matter?
Use them for that purpose, no need to swear them off completely.
I remember reading somewhere that most (modal) dialogs are just lazy design. It's easier to have a dialog component and throw whatever notice or controls in there. It's a predictable and flexible canvas. Your password is incorrect? Error dialog. Easier to design and build that a warning state on the text-boxes and a message close to the login button. Writing a post? Editor dialog. It's easier to design and build than…
Maybe it's lazy but the important question should be: is it good design? I don't think it is, as it hides some information from the main page. But I think it can be done well and be useful, as said at the end of the article. After all, OS use a lot of modals.
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
I don't love retro design either but that seems irrelevant. To anyone who's familiar with the topic it's immediately clear from the copy that the author understands it. Considering that the target audience is other designers, why does the presentation matter?
IMO it totally kills it. Others may not have as strong of an opinion. This is the age old question about separating art from the artist. With authoritative didactics, especially as a stranger on the internet, it is even more important to associate art with the artist so to speak. It comes with responsibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe it's lazy but the important question should be: is it good design? I don't think it is, as it hides some information from the main page. But I think it can be done well and be useful, as said at the end of the article. After all, OS use a lot of modals.
The more important question: do the people paying you care if it’s good design? Because the people who have paid me thus far in my career have not cared.