Live data from Hacker News

The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

uxdesign.cc

41–50 of 410 posts

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#42
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 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.

> Flatness in phones works because we can use our full attention

I very much agree with you, and would like to add that flatness in phones is a feature because today phones are pocket computers, and computers should be able to provide any arbitrary UI to function as such. Cars on the other hand are not a computer nor are they intended to function as one.

The fact that modern cars expose part of their on-board computer to the driver is no excuse to treat any capability that may be handled by said computer as something exclusively accessible via a touchscreen UI, especially when its something that is expected to be interacted with while driving (audio playback control, climate control, windscreen wipers, etc.). A touchscreen is fine for features that should not be done while driving and did not exist or were not easily accessible prior to the ubiquity of touchscreens in cars. For all intents and purposes those are computer features. However, subjecting anything that was previously available via mechanical interaction to it is an unacceptable regression.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#44
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…

On the other hand, literally last night the physical knob for one of my stove burners came off in my hand leaving me having to use a pair of pliers to turn it off. So, your mileage may vary.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#45
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.

Haha that’s true! I am an electrical engineering student, if I have to guess it may be due to random electric charges, probably grounding was not done properly.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#46
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…

If one is going to go into the effort and cost to put an SoC onboard that can run a touchscreen, one should just have the device communicate with the touchscreen computer in your pocket instead.

Common basic functions: knobs dials switches.

Extended functions: there's an app for that, or suffer through modal button changes like you describe.

Save on BOM costs, less points of failure, and does not require an SoC with display controller and a software stack running a (usually janky and slow and non-standard) UI.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#47
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.

I think this is a safety function. You may not be able to turn off the stove yourself if something boils over, and the buttons get covered in hot liquid.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Haha that’s true! I am an electrical engineering student, if I have to guess it may be due to random electric charges, probably grounding was not done properly.

I know nothing about electricity but water always seems to confuse those hotplates... or laptop's touchpads FWIW. (how do I know??)

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#49
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.

In my house, my electric stove has a master isolation switch for exactly this purpose.

Re: The benefits of “low tech” user interfaces

#50
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And this heat degrades the component. And it is almost never worth replacing a control board over buying new. There is, of course, no hidden agenda.
Post reply on HN