81–90 of 115 posts
Might be a bit off-topic… But: The one big question I have with elevator UX is this: why isn’t it possible to deselect a choice? So pressed 10th floor but wanted 11th. There is no way to press button 10 and then button 11 to correct that mistake. Will I ever solve this mystery?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not worth complicating the UX to address such a minor issue.
Minor to you... Introducing a great experience is the job of good UX. Not simply limiting options and saying 'done'. I am sure there are better options to handle this. Seems like no-one has put the effort into it (yet).
In these cases, it is simply the best UX to keep everything really simple.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment right here is an example of thinking like a good designer. No amount of sleek surfaces and cool lighting can beat this.
Leave the button recessed after it's been selected, even if the LED fails (how often does this actually happen?) it's still a visual and tactile indicator. To deselect the floor, simply press in again.
Might be a bit off-topic… But: The one big question I have with elevator UX is this: why isn’t it possible to deselect a choice? So pressed 10th floor but wanted 11th. There is no way to press button 10 and then button 11 to correct that mistake. Will I ever solve this mystery?
Might be a bit off-topic… But: The one big question I have with elevator UX is this: why isn’t it possible to deselect a choice? So pressed 10th floor but wanted 11th. There is no way to press button 10 and then button 11 to correct that mistake. Will I ever solve this mystery?
You are perhaps trying to optimise for a one-person elevator trip, rather than thinking of what is the optimum for a repeated game with many concurrent trip players that includes both cooperator players and defector players. An elevator is a common good to its users.
If people could cancel a destination, then there is less incentive for people to have to prethink their destination before getting on the elevator. Leading to more likely to waste concurrent elevator users’ time in the long run?
If you could cancel a destination, defector players could cancel your destination to speed up their trip (with resulting policing and status meta-games etcetera).
Elevators mostly have the lowest-common-denominator for a UI. Where is the incentive for elevator purchasers (building procurement or facilities) to demand an improved UI? Would a manufacturer get any profit by providing an improved UI? Would such a UI be accessible to the blind? Discoverable? Usable? Cleanable? Predictable (e.g. elevator arriving indicators on destination floors)? Safety? Complexity?
There are a huge number of factors to building anything complicated.
Also see https://danluu.com/sounds-easy/ and https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/ and all of the elevator wiki starting here https://elevation.fandom.com/wiki/Fire_service_mode_(EFS)
Disclaimer: I’m not an elevator engineer. I feel your pain: I want a government department of niggles which catalogues minor complaints and gets them fixed. Although I admit I am pessimistic enough to think it would only end up increasing the total number of niggles due to second-order effects.
Might be a bit off-topic… But: The one big question I have with elevator UX is this: why isn’t it possible to deselect a choice? So pressed 10th floor but wanted 11th. There is no way to press button 10 and then button 11 to correct that mistake. Will I ever solve this mystery?
In larger/public settings, offering this would be counterproductive, for the reasons listed by sibling comments.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Distances are squares, actually square roots of squares, in Euclidian space, so it makes sense to find squares when we deal with distances. An intuitive way to look at it is that square function is the simplest function that goes down until it reaches a minimum, and then back up again. If you want this property, you can expect to find squares somewhere. Distance have this property: if you move in a straight line, the…
> An intuitive way to look at it is that square function is the simplest function that goes down until it reaches a minimum, and then back up again By what measure of simplicity is x^2 simpler than abs(x)? I mean, if you added the caveat “with a continuous derivative”, sure.
Its description is shorter in English and in most programming languages, mainly because it doesn't have a conditional. (Which is related to it being differentiable everywhere).
clearly they aren't using "destination dispatch" where the elevator tells you where to wait after you tell it where you want to go. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destination_dispatch I've only seen this in one building. It was a little weird, but it supposedly is coming soon to more and more elevators.
I live in a building that has this. As a resident - it works. Whoever made this building made a whole lot of mistakes though: - They put this into a building with public spaces (e.g. a doctor's office). - When standing in front of the elevators, nowhere does it say which office is on which floor (it says so in the lobby which you walked by to get to the elevators) - The screens where riders have to select floors auto…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comment right here is an example of thinking like a good designer. No amount of sleek surfaces and cool lighting can beat this.
Leave the button recessed after it's been selected, even if the LED fails (how often does this actually happen?) it's still a visual and tactile indicator. To deselect the floor, simply press in again.
Might be a bit off-topic… But: The one big question I have with elevator UX is this: why isn’t it possible to deselect a choice? So pressed 10th floor but wanted 11th. There is no way to press button 10 and then button 11 to correct that mistake. Will I ever solve this mystery?