The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
uxdesign.cc
The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
1–10 of 410 posts
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#2> During the recent home device project I mentioned earlier, one of the biggest supporters of a touchscreen-based solution was the team’s marketing specialist.
Why am I not surprised?
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#3> During the recent home device project I mentioned earlier, one of the biggest supporters of a touchscreen-based solution was the team’s marketing specialist. Why am I not surprised?
I came to write my official paper letters with vi :hardcopy in 70ies RFC typewriter style.
Helps to focus on the content. That's exactly what marketing dreads.
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#4Physical car buttons and knobs vs touch screens
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#5Modern cars seem to be moving towards all controls on a touch screen somewhere. I suppose this allows for more frequent updates, but in my experience it just leads to more bugs and more painful factory updates.
Not to mention using a touchscreen to adjust the temperature while driving is incredibly dangerous compared to a dial you can feel for without taking your eyes off the road.
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#6Humane Interface by J. Raskin had some interesting points about how to make low tech interfaces.
You need essentially eliminate "modes" - like the clock/set time/radio mode buttons on your alarm clock. I'm not saying he's right - but he's worth reading.
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#7Reminds me of modern stoves. All of them have touch controls which means every time a friend of mine is presenting me their new kitchen, I have no idea how to use the stove. They always say "No, no, it's really easy to get used to" but it's still frustrating because the touch controls never bring any new features to the table. They are just knobs abstracted into separated buttons and sliders, of which the latter you are not quite sure if you should drag them or just point to the wanted value. With a physical knob, the intuition of the laws of physics tells you how the knob can be turned.
They are easier to clean for sure but I can't believe the current "click this, slide that" UX is the best the manufacturers could come up with.
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#8If there is an analog bar, you know about where you are in the whole range. If there is just a number, you often have no idea how good or bad it really is.
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#9OT: I have never before read the word "aughts" and had to look it up. Turns out this describes the first decade of the 21st century (or of any century?), i.e. the years 2000 to 2009. The British seem to use the word "noughties".
Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces
#10Modern cars seem to be moving towards all controls on a touch screen somewhere. I suppose this allows for more frequent updates, but in my experience it just leads to more bugs and more painful factory updates. Not to mention using a touchscreen to adjust the temperature while driving is incredibly dangerous compared to a dial you can feel for without taking your eyes off the road.
I have grown to heavily dislike the whole smartify everything.
Haptic feedback is a core part of how humans process the world, and to remove it in favor of more frequent updates seems like a naive decision at best.
Flatness in phones works because we can use our full attention - which is also why car accidents happen when people use it while driving.