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

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#21

Post by tobr » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:59 AM UTC

christophilus wrote: post #13

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.

Often they’re also too damn close to the heating elements, so you risk burning your fingers when you operate them.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#22

Post by nkrisc » Wed, May 25, 2022, 10:59 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.

The touch screens are the only thing keeping me on dino juice cars. I want to go electric, but they all have these awful touchscreens! I don’t want to navigate a menu to change the temperature or turn on a seat warmer.

I’m just not buying an EV until there’s one that doesn’t rely on a giant touch screen for everything or I can’t buy an ICE vehicle anymore.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#23

Post by usrn » Wed, May 25, 2022, 11:02 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…

>No, no, it's really easy to get used to

Says everyone on Linux with their ridiculous custom setup on an obscure window manager. The difference here being that you can change things to make them more comfortable and don't have to wait for some "designer" to have the idea first.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#24

Post by XorNot » Wed, May 25, 2022, 11:02 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…

Cleaning is what I spend far more time doing with a stove, and is more important, then the very brief period I'm involved in setting the temperature during cooking.

So it seems like a fairly good trade-off to me.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#25

Post by arky527 » Wed, May 25, 2022, 11:03 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…

> Changing the temperature while driving on a good touch interface is trivial and incredibly far from incredibly dangerous

Looking away for even ~3s at motorway speeds is 100m driven without looking at whats in front of you, I'd say that's fairly dangerous

> The great benefit of a touch screen is unlimited update capabilities

It also introduces a single point of failure for any features on it, at least with physical buttons you stand more chance of operating other parts of the car if one breaks.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#26

Post by blackhaz » Wed, May 25, 2022, 11:05 AM UTC

flashingleds wrote: post #15

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 bo…

What are the examples of touchscreens done right besides the iPhone which is also on a UX downhill since, probably iPhone 4 or 5 era?

Cars? Motherfucking abysmal. ATMs? How many times we tried to press a button realizing you're missing it completely because there's a 3-inch think screen? Laptops? Only those who like fingerprints. Cameras? I think if you are seriously using it, you prefer tactile. Signature pads? This should not even exist. Vending machines? I think they're more confusing with buttons jumping on screen and changing their labels than without. Handheld video games? Still rely on buttons.

I wish designers would not try to stick them in everything. They're only good for small handheld devices to cram lots of functions in, and they're always a UX compromise. They can only improve the number of functions you can squeeze in a device.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#27

Post by usrn » Wed, May 25, 2022, 11:06 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…

Changing the temperature on a touch screen will always suck even the UI is completely modeless (imagine that!) On my car I can just press my hand against the console without looking and feel around for the controls. You can not do this with a touch screen no matter how good the interface is.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#28

Post by Pasorrijer » Wed, May 25, 2022, 11:06 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 also find that many of these touchscreens are designed with California in mind. Sure, touchscreens are great when it's sunny and 22C. But when it's -25 and the car feels like a freezer, the touchscreen is sluggish and won't accepted gloved inputs, I start swearing and think about selling the car.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#29

Post by tobr » Wed, May 25, 2022, 11:08 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…

I’m hopeful that we will see less and less gratuitous use of “hi-tech” UI in consumer electronics in the near future. It seems that many manufacturers still believe consumers think blinking LEDs and touchscreens and beeps and chromed plastic spaceship shapes are cool. Despite most of us using high resolution touchscreens many hours per day.

A good physical knob or button usually feels much more luxurious and expensive.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#30

Post by NikolaNovak » Wed, May 25, 2022, 11:09 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…

None of my friends say their stove touch buttons are great. They are not just unintuitive, most implementations are painfully slow.

(my own pet peeve though are microwaves - they are a positive monstrosity of horrible interface bearing no connection to actual typical usage. I'd like one with a massive "add 30s and start button", and anything else is a nice optional extra for me :-D