The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces • Hacker News Board

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#11

Post by ratww » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:39 AM UTC

arky527 wrote: post #5

Modern 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 really wonder if the possibility of updates alone can make software worse. Because you don't have to "get it right" on the first try. And the updates always contain something more than bug and security fixes, which often help keeping the quality of the experience low, despite fixed bugs.

All the smart TVs I ever had lasted a long long time physically, but after a couple years they invariably started being noticeable slower than when I bought. The same happened to a guitar effects unit I had: changing patches became somewhat slower after update. And the battery of a wireless guitar transmitter I had now only lasts half the time it used to after the update. I honestly can say I dread updating almost any software today.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#12

Post by h3mb3 » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:40 AM UTC

arky527 wrote: post #5

Modern 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 also imagine this trend is bad from the ergonomics / RSI perspective. For generations, we've been using various kinds of per-appliance controls, with various shapes, sizes and stiffnesses. Since the past 10 years almost all of them have been replaced by a flat piece of glass. People are increasingly doing only a couple of motions with their hands throughout the day without any variety (tap/drag without any tactile feedback).

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#13

Post by christophilus » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:40 AM UTC

s4i wrote: post #7

Reminds 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…

Having had one of these, I just want to say: “Never again.” Mine would turn itself on when you washed it and turn itself off when something splattered (like 50% of the time when I boiled water).

It made me wonder if anyone actually tested the damn design before approval for mass production.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#14

Post by Gigachad » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:42 AM UTC

eimrine wrote: post #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?

I don't buy it tbh. Most home appliances are sufficiently complex that physical buttons are not intuitive. Ask someone to change the clock on their oven vs on their phone. Most could do it on the phone but not the oven. And there are countless more practical examples of this issue.

My Breville coffee machine only has buttons and knobs, which works fine for the basic flow since everything has a dedicated button. But once you want to do something like run a cleaning cycle you will have to read the manual every time because there is nothing intuitive about holding double shot + single shot and then power for 3 seconds. Or holding program and then power to open temperature adjust then clicking one of the buttons to set a temp which isn't labeled and needs the manual to decipher.

While on the touch screen model, the basic flow might be slightly less nice, but the most complex flows are also reduced to about the same complexity and can be intuitively worked out while using the device. Combining physical buttons for basic flow with a touch screen is the best of both imo. I have used some ovens which use a normal knob like it would on an older oven, but if you want to do something like start a self clean cycle or adjust steaming, its done via the touch screen.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#15

Post by flashingleds » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:45 AM UTC

It can go both ways of course. The first edition of Norman’s classic ‘design of everyday things’ was 1988, and it’s interesting to read that book today and see how a lot of the hard problems he was discussing were completely solved by the advent of touchscreen interfaces (specifically, the ability to reconfigure the interface according to what tasks are relevant at that moment). Done right, touchscreens are a huge boon for usability (I mean, look at what the iphone did). Done poorly they’re a disaster, but that’s been true forever with UI design regardless of the tools at hand.

(I haven’t read the revised edition (2013) of Norman’s book, I guess he must address touchscreens)

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#16

Post by ratww » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:46 AM UTC

lucidguppy wrote: post #6

Humane 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.

That's a great point about "modes".

Even 40 years people already joked about the alarm clock you mentioned: everyone knew how to use VCRs, but the damn clock was never adjusted. Since it was neither intuitive, nor something a user would memorize how to do, most VCRs just sat there saying 12:00 or 00:00 forever. For the alarm clock, of course, we had to learn since it was its main function.

I see this in music equipment a lot, too. To program something with modes you need significantly more time than something with just knobs. And the performance possibilities are also much limited as soon as you bring in menu-diving.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#17

Post by undefinedzero » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:47 AM UTC

arky527 wrote: post #5

Modern 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.

More bugs definitely, but car manufacturers put so much effort into QA for the essential features that they really just short on never are released broken.

Changing the temperature while driving on a good touch interface is trivial and incredibly far from incredibly dangerous. Besides with CC systems nowadays people look at the set temperature just as often. More advanced features like toggling internal air circulation do require a peek, but so do the buttons on most classical cars where you have multiple buttons in a row with unlit icons.

I still prefer buttons for the tactile feel and feedback, but the downsides you listed are pretty much made up.

The great benefit of a touch screen is unlimited update capabilities. It seems absurd to me that there are still cars rolling off the factory line that have unupdatable software in 2022. Your car is basically outdated and replaceable by something better within a year. That’s great for the manufacturers, but not for the customer. Compare that to a 3+ year old Tesla which works almost as good as a brand new one despite big upgrades to their internals, largely thanks to regular updates.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#18

Post by Gigachad » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:48 AM UTC

s4i wrote: post #7

Reminds 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…

My parents have one and I think it works really well. There is a physical power button, start button, as well as a physical knob. For the basic usage, you press power, turn the knob to select the mode, press start, then turn the knob to select your desired temperature.

No use of the touch screen for the basic flow. But if you want to do something else like start self cleaning or turn steaming on, you use the touchscreen rather than pull out a manual that tells you to press button 1, 3 and 4 for 4 seconds.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#19

Post by nicoburns » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:48 AM UTC

Gigachad wrote: post #14

eimrine wrote: post #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?

I don't buy it tbh. Most home appliances are sufficiently complex that physical buttons are not intuitive. Ask someone to change the clock on their oven vs on their phone. Most could do it on the phone but not the oven. And there are countless more practical examples of this issue. My Breville coffee machine only has buttons and knobs, which works fine for the basic flow since everything has a dedicated button. But o…

> Combining physical buttons for basic flow with a touch screen is the best of both imo

This. But if I have to choose, then I'll have physical buttons over a touch screen. Why? Because I use the "basic flow" every damn day. Whereas I only need to set the clock every few months.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#20

Post by Joeri » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:52 AM UTC

undefinedzero wrote: post #17

arky527 wrote: post #5

Modern 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.

More bugs definitely, but car manufacturers put so much effort into QA for the essential features that they really just short on never are released broken. Changing the temperature while driving on a good touch interface is trivial and incredibly far from incredibly dangerous. Besides with CC systems nowadays people look at the set temperature just as often. More advanced features like toggling internal air circulati…

I still prefer buttons for the tactile feel and feedback, but the downsides you listed are pretty much made up.

Or, maybe your personal experience doesn’t translate to everyone, and touch controls are indeed dangerously distracting for most people. What we need here is evidence (user studies) and not anecdote, but anecdotally I can say operating a touch screen without looking at it directly is not something I’m capable of doing, even for things I use often.