361–370 of 641 posts
You don't need two different versions of the software, one that is easy and one that is powerful. You can have one version that is both easy and powerful. Key concepts here are (1) progressive disclosure and (2) constraints. See Don Norman's Design of Everyday things. https://www.nngroup.com/articles/progressive-disclosure/ https://www.nngroup.com/videos/positive-constraints-in-ux-wo...
The thing is this takes a lot of resources to get right. FOSS developers simply don't have the wherewithal - money, inclination or taste - to do this. So, by default, there are no simple things. Everything's complex, everything needs training. And this is okay because the main users of FOSS software is others of a similar bend as the developers themselves.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I age, this x1000. Even simple slack app on my windows laptop - clicking in the overview scroll bar is NOT "move down a page". It seems to be "the longer you click, the further it moves" or something equally disgusting. Usually, I dock my laptop and use an external mouse with wheel, and it's easy to do what I want. With a touchpad? Forget it.. I'm clicking 20x to get it to move to the top - IF I can hit the 5-pixe…
With a touchpad? Use two fingers to scroll (also works horizontally). Who's managing to hit a tiny scrollbar that disappears with a touchpad‽
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Overall, the development world does not intuitively understand the difficulty of creating good interfaces (for people that aren’t developers.) In dev work, the complexity is obvious, and that makes it easy for outsiders to understand— they look at the code we’re writing and say “wow you can read that?!” I think that can give developers a mistaken impression that other peoples work is far less complex than it is. With…
IMO they just don’t care enough. They want people to use it but it is not the end of world if it stays niche
> Free audio editing software that requires hours of learning to be useful for simple tasks. To be fair, the Audacity UX designer made a massive video about the next UX redesign and how he tried to get rid of "modes" and the "Audacity says no" problem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYM3TWf_G38 So this problem should get better in the future. Good UX (doesn't necessarily have to have a flashy UI, but just a good UX)…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Overall, the development world does not intuitively understand the difficulty of creating good interfaces Nor can the design world, for that matter. They think that making slightly darker gray text on gray background using a tiny font and leaving loads of empty space is peak design. Meanwhile my father cannot use most websites because of this.
What pisses me off is that the “brutalist” style in the 1990s was arguably perfect. Having standardized persistent menus, meaningful compact toolbars was nice. Then the world threw away the menus, adopted an idiotic “ribbon” that uses more screen real estate. Unsatisfied, we dumbed down desktop apps to look like mobile apps, even though input technology remains different. Websites also decided to avoid blue underline…
A few days ago I had trouble charging an electric rental car. When plugging it in, it kept saying "charging scheduled" on the dash, but I couldn't find out how to disable that and make it charge right away. The manual seemed to indicate it could only be done with an app (ugh, disgusting). Went back to the rental company, they made it charge and showed me a video of the screen where to do that. I asked "but how on earth do you get to that screen?". Turned out you could fucking swipe the tablet display to get to a different screen! There was absolutely no indication that this was possible, and the screen even implied that it was modal because there were icons at the bottom which changed the display of the screen.
So you had: zero affordances, modal design on a specific tab, and the different modes showed different tabs at the top, further leading me to believe that this was all there was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most fields just don’t have the same culture of collaborative everyone-wins that software does. Artists don’t produce CC art in anywhere close to the same influence as engineers produce software. This is probably due to some kind of compounding effect available in software that isn’t available in graphics. Software people love writing software to a degree where they’ll just give it away. You just won’t find artists d…
There's actually a fair bit of highly influential CC-licensed artwork out there. Wikipedia made a whole free encyclopedia. The SCP Foundation wiki is it's own subculture. There's loads of Free Culture photography on Wikimedia Commons (itself mirrored from Flickr). A good chunk of your YouTube feed is probably using Kevin McCleod music - and probably fucking up the attribution strings, too. A lot of artists don't real…
Another thing is that the vast amount of fan fiction out there has a hub-and-spoke model forming an S_n graph around the solitary 'original work' and there are community norms around not 'appropriating' characters and so on, but you're right that community works like the SCP Foundation definitely show that software-like property of remixing of open work.
Anyway, all to say I liked your comment very much but couldn't reply because you seem to have been accidentally hellbanned some short while ago. All of your comments are pretty good, so I reached out to the HN guys and they fixed it up (and confirmed it was a false positive). If you haven't seen people engage with what you're saying, it was a technical issue not a quality issue, so I hope you'll keep posting because this is stuff I like reading on HN. And if you have a blog with an RSS feed or something, it would be cool to see it on your profile.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the linked article addresses that. They're not advocating for removing the full-feature UI, they just advise having a simple version that does the one thing (or couple of things) most users want in a simple way. Users who want to do more can just use the full version.
Users don't want "to do more". They want to do "that one extra thing". Going from the "novice" version to the "full version" just to get that one extra thing is a real problem for a lot of people. But how do you address this as a software designer?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMO they just don’t care enough. They want people to use it but it is not the end of world if it stays niche
[flagged]
It would be honestly interesting if someone actually did a study regarding it.
I do agree with this statement but it isn't as if everybody doesn't have other opportunity costs, people might have video games as hobbies or just normal hobbies in general as well which could be considered opportunity costs
The question to me which sounds more interesting which I feel like I maybe reading in the lines but does the society shower attention to beauty which can make them feel less susceptible to lets say calculus which might feel a lot more boring respectively?
Generally speaking, I was seeing this the other day but female involvement overall in the whole stem department has reduced in %'s iirc.
Another factor could be the weirdness or expectation. Like just as you think this, this is assumed by many people about hot chicks lets say, so if a hot chick is actually into calculus and she tells it, people would say things like oh wow I didn't know that or really?? which could feel weirdness or this expectation of them to not be this way and be conventional and not have interests it seems.
I have seen people get shocked in online communities if a girl is even learning programming or doing things like hyprland (maybe myself included as it was indeed rare)
Naturally I would love if more girls could be into this as I feel like talking to girls about my hobbies when she isn't that interested or not having common hobbies hurts me when I talk to them, they can appreciate it but I feel like I can tell them anything, I am not that deep of a coder right now as much as I am a linux tinkerer, building linux iso's from scratch, shell scripting and building some web services etc. , I like to tinker with software, naturally the word used in unix/foss communities for this is called hacking which should be the perfect way to describe what I mean except they think I am talking about cybersecurity and want me to "hack something", Sorry about this rant but I have stopped saying this hacking just because of how correlated it is to cybersecurity to the normal public. I just say that I love tinkering with software nowadays. Side note, but is there a better word for what I am saying other than hacking?
People want features, and they're willing to learn complicated UIs to get them. A software that has hyper simplified options has a very limited audience. Take his example: we have somebody who has somehow obtained a "weird" video file, yet whose understanding of video amounts to wanting it to be "normal" so they can play it. For such a person, there are two paths: become familiar enough with video formats that you un…