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

We need physical audio kill switches

rubenerd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 443 posts

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#241

Post by aareet »

m463 wrote: post #200
skohan wrote: post #126

I've been thinking the same about power switches lately. If I turn a flashlight, or an old radio on or off, I flip a switch and get the result I want. With my 65 EUR gamepad, or 300 EUR headphones, I hold a button and wait several seconds for the result. Why has UX regressed so much in these areas?

I have always wanted a flashlight with a brightness knob, that clicks to off. It is incredibly hard to find this. I have one somewhere, but the knob was a little silly: https://amzn.com/B07BDQS3XX I think a better design would be a ring around the circumference that you twist. But I agree - when it came to putting a good stereo in my car (when you used to be able to do such a thing) I always kept looking until I foun…

Maglite flashlights behave as you describe - you turn the head to turn on/off and change intensity or pattern

https://www.amazon.com/s?k=maglite

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#242

Post by amelius »

formerly_proven wrote: post #224
amelius wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't you switch the bias voltage off?

Yes, but then we're back to loud popping sounds when you turn it back on.

You could ramp up/down the voltage gradually.

Anyway the thing is connected to an ADC. The computer can sense when the switch is turned on/off, and turn off (or flush) the audio pipeline at the appropriate times.

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#244

Post by slowmovintarget »

systemvoltage wrote: post #72
brandon272 wrote: post #29

I let my spouse, who likes the novelty of a touchscreen, talk me into a Whirlpool oven a couple years ago that is controlled by touchscreen. I had no idea it was possible to hate an oven so much. The only saving grace is that the stovetop elements are still controlled by knobs.

I don't understand why people find novelty of touchscreens appealing. We've got to do a better job of educating consumers. The marketing behind touchscreens is so powerful that it is unanimously considered as a feature, something you must have. I get angry just thinking about the amount of marketing bullshit around touchscreens. Just go to Garmin Aviation website and now a lot of operation in airplane cockpits is off…

Very high-end or professional ovens will not have this. These are gimmicks for people with too much money, and too little sense.

I don't want my toaster posting on Facebook. I don't want to link my refrigerator with my Google account. And no, I do not expect my microwave to post pics of my food to Instagram. I want a toaster that toasts properly and can be cleaned. I want a refrigerator that runs forever, doesn't leak, and doesn't build up frost in the freezer. I want a microwave that won't burn out after a year and will heat evenly.

I've managed to find all of these things, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to find appliances that aren't disposable, favoring internet-enablement to high-quality construction. I'll pay for the stainless steel... leave the wi-fi hardware out, please.

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#245

Post by rv-de »

onion-soup wrote: post #11

Nothing will ever come close to convenience of analogue volume knobs. They give both immediate action and infinite granular control. Same goes for kitchen stoves. All the modern touch controls with step-based control is the absolute nightmare in terms of UI.

Talking about knobs on stoves and UX - I never understood why American stoves have the knobs on a panel at the back of the stove instead of at the front. Isn't it inconvenient having to reach over hot, frying, steaming pots and pans?

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#246

Post by serf »

nexuist wrote: post #188
systemvoltage wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people find novelty of touchscreens appealing. We've got to do a better job of educating consumers. The marketing behind touchscreens is so powerful that it is unanimously considered as a feature, something you must have. I get angry just thinking about the amount of marketing bullshit around touchscreens. Just go to Garmin Aviation website and now a lot of operation in airplane cockpits is off…

I disagree wholeheartedly that cockpit touchscreens (as a concept) are worse than physical knobs and switches. What are you doing in an FMC that requires you to split focus between operating the plane and operating the FMC? In what scenario are you going to need to create a new flight plan while pulling stunt maneuvers? When are you going to need to do anything involving navigation if you do not first have control (i…

>It costs Tesla $0 per vehicle to add a new button to their cars. It costs millions for everyone else. This is not a useless capability; it makes a difference every single day.

Complaint #1 about Teslas' from owners that I have spoken to is that the UI/UX requires total re-learning as opposed to other cars, and then when the re-learning phase is complete, it's still difficult to operate without full attention.

Sure, the argument 'Oh, they shouldn't be dividing their attention from driving.' is all well and good; but try convincing normal commuters that they should pull over to adjust the volume on their stereo. I don't think you'll win that one.

Tactile/physical components are just easier to operate without know-how, and without focus being pulled to them in its' entirety. The linear movement of a volume jogging dial is intuitive; there are two diretions on both the knob and the mechanism which is being affected -- it's direct, and obvious.

Touchscreens, usually, are none of these. Using a touch screen telephone is not an eyes off exercises, but dialing and talking to someone on any of my old flip phones or Nokias was. There was a fundamental shift from worrying about being able to do one thing very well to doing all things OK in the cell phone world, and I think that it's a shame that companies like Tesla think that this is a philosophy that should be pursued among auto-makers.

Thankfully, many automakers that were dead set on touch interfaces have begun to realize that they're not good everywhere.

Mercedes/BMW/Audi went away from buttons just to find themselves crawling back... and i'm okay with that. It makes the cars easier to operate, and less focus dividing on the road.

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#247

Post by ddingus »

rv-de wrote: post #245
onion-soup wrote: post #11

Nothing will ever come close to convenience of analogue volume knobs. They give both immediate action and infinite granular control. Same goes for kitchen stoves. All the modern touch controls with step-based control is the absolute nightmare in terms of UI.

Talking about knobs on stoves and UX - I never understood why American stoves have the knobs on a panel at the back of the stove instead of at the front. Isn't it inconvenient having to reach over hot, frying, steaming pots and pans?

Yes. It is stupid but cheap, IMHO.

Still, those are better than buttons.

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#248

Post by ranger207 »

m463 wrote: post #200
skohan wrote: post #126

I've been thinking the same about power switches lately. If I turn a flashlight, or an old radio on or off, I flip a switch and get the result I want. With my 65 EUR gamepad, or 300 EUR headphones, I hold a button and wait several seconds for the result. Why has UX regressed so much in these areas?

I have always wanted a flashlight with a brightness knob, that clicks to off. It is incredibly hard to find this. I have one somewhere, but the knob was a little silly: https://amzn.com/B07BDQS3XX I think a better design would be a ring around the circumference that you twist. But I agree - when it came to putting a good stereo in my car (when you used to be able to do such a thing) I always kept looking until I foun…

You want one of these: http://flashlights.parametrek.com/index.html?type=flashlight...

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#249

Post by ddingus »

vagab0nd wrote: post #151
brandon272 wrote: post #29

I let my spouse, who likes the novelty of a touchscreen, talk me into a Whirlpool oven a couple years ago that is controlled by touchscreen. I had no idea it was possible to hate an oven so much. The only saving grace is that the stovetop elements are still controlled by knobs.

Ah yes, the touch screen ovens. I have one. Every time I open it, the steam rushes out and registers the touch screen, doing something random each time. You never know what it'll do, it's exciting.

Good grief! I chuckled. We are lucky hand have easily maintained appliances from an older era.

So easy.

Not as efficient or cool, but nobody wants the newer stuff.

Re: We need physical audio kill switches

#250

Post by oriolid »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #227
wvenable wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My work coffee maker has a touch screen and the interface is so laggy it's insane. The manufacturer controls every aspect of the hardware and software so it makes no sense -- either make the hardware more powerful or make the software simpler!

>The manufacturer controls every aspect of the hardware and software so it makes no sense Makes perfect sense, the only way you'll get a responsive touchscreen is if one of the engineers behind it actually cares about it being responsive. Otherwise the job goes down to the designer to try and pressure the engineers into making it responsive which there is a chance they might not even be skilled enough to understand h…

Most importantly, you need product manager that cares about the UI being responsive. As an engineer it's not produce a responsive UI if you have time only for a barely working product.
Post reply on HN