Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

cs.umd.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 173 posts

Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

#81

Post by GMoromisato »

The one "rule" I wish it covered is about surfacing/exposing the conceptual model to the user.

If I don't understand the conceptual model of the product, I will always be confused, no matter how well-labeled the icons are. For example, imagine a product that has a "New Configuration" command. What is a "Configuration"? Is it like a template that lets me define other objects? Is it a way to rapidly switch between different sets of options? Is it a container, like a folder?

The UI must be designed so that the user can infer the conceptual model just from exploring the interface. This is not always easy.

Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

#82

Post by ShadowBanThis01 »

nox101 wrote: post #48
ShadowBanThis01 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Annoying as shit. If I'm trying to log into something with an E-mail address (already a fail, but that's another topic) and password, and I click "forgot password," don't take me to a form where I have to re-enter the goddamned E-mail address I JUST ENTERED.

Or every customer service phone line where the automated system asks for your info (account# or phone#) and then the customer service rep asks again >:(

I actually bring this up when they ask me again. "Didn't I just enter that?"

Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

#83

Post by Ygg2 »

GMoromisato wrote: post #81

The one "rule" I wish it covered is about surfacing/exposing the conceptual model to the user. If I don't understand the conceptual model of the product, I will always be confused, no matter how well-labeled the icons are. For example, imagine a product that has a "New Configuration" command. What is a "Configuration"? Is it like a template that lets me define other objects? Is it a way to rapidly switch between diff…

Point of good interface is to hide implementation detail while guiding you towards your goal.

Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

#85

Post by ozim »

One thing is that some times some things have to be made harder for end users good or for business rules protection.

It is sometimes hard to explain but as an example - delete confirmation - it gets in the way of user because user wants to delete stuff and be done with it. Preventing accidental deletes is more important than any specific user convenience.

Keep in mind this is most generic example I came up with on the spot. There are more complex scenarios that are complex for the same reasons. But I find people trying to remove such fences even if they don’t know why they’re there. Claiming simplicity and user convenience as golden rule.

Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

#87

Post by TaroEld »

Espressosaurus wrote: post #80
userbinator wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can still access the items in the ribbons with Alt key sequences (although I agree that they've become far less discoverable), but the full-screen(!) "file menu" abomination that they added in later versions is even more hostile and offensive.

Especially after they made everything cloud-first, making saving my damn documents to my local drive a pain in the ass.

F12 brings up the old "Save As" filebrowser.

Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

#88

Post by hutzlibu »

xp84 wrote: post #30
graypegg wrote: post #7

A designer I worked with years ago had a great explanation for why consistency is important. It’s not about a limited colour palette or a careful selection of fonts no one will ever notice. Chasing the specifics makes horrible software. Some people equate less diversity in their UI to more consistency. It’s about letting someone become an expert in your software. Microsoft office was always his example. People pride…

As a non-"Designer" something I never shut up about is how powerful it is to bootstrap that expertness by leveraging the UI elements and concepts your users already know from elsewhere, for instance, literal native UI widgets, and more broadly, highly-recognizable simple fundamental widget types. When you have the opportunity to present 4 options, you could use your brand's themed version of [Insert UI Library]'s sea…

"you could use your brand's themed version of [Insert UI Library]'s searchable combobox with checkable items, or you could show 4 normal labeled radio buttons or checkboxes. "

Ahhh ... that's likely a Stilbruch (break of style) my design professor would have exclaimed. Designers hate those and I came to understand why and try to avoid it wherever possible. It is something that can be irritating and bringing in confusion, if suddenly there is a element out of place.

But you can have "highly-recognizable simple fundamental widget types" without breaking the style. It is just harder and of course, a functional ugly design is in my opinion still way better than a good looking broken design. But the goal should be something consistent - in terms of functionality and style.

Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

#89

Post by Kranar »

ozim wrote: post #85

One thing is that some times some things have to be made harder for end users good or for business rules protection. It is sometimes hard to explain but as an example - delete confirmation - it gets in the way of user because user wants to delete stuff and be done with it. Preventing accidental deletes is more important than any specific user convenience. Keep in mind this is most generic example I came up with on th…

I really detest that principle. For the design of my software I make almost every action reversible and avoid at all costs confirmation dialogs or anything that makes it seem like the user could be at fault for something if they choose incorrectly.

I also work on financial trading software so I do need to think a great deal about user error and the best principle I have found is to never create a situation where a confirmation is needed.

Among new users it creates anxiety and indecisiveness, and among experienced users they just ignore it and it's noise to them. All confirmation dialogs do is make the developer/designer punt responsibility off to the user for what is generally a bad design decision.

Re: Golden Rules of Interface Design (2013)

#90

Post by cyberax »

joeblubaugh wrote: post #56
DonHopkins wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I worked with Ben Shneiderman at the UMD Human Computer Interaction Lab developing pie menus, and one of the important principles of pie menus, especially in comparison to both traditional linear menus, and invisible gestures as used by the iPad and mobile apps, is that they smoothly TRAIN novice users to become experts by using "rehearsal". Pie menus can lead, follow, or get out of the way. The way a novice uses the…

Do you know of any work about how to combine pie menus and keyboard usage? Mousing is very uncomfortable for me, but if a pie menu could be used with a keyboard-attached joystick, it might be a really quick way to work.

Basically, you use cursor keys to select the direction. So you can just memorize the paths to the correct items.

Modern console games use the same idea for communication wheels, that are usable from game controllers.

Post reply on HN