[deleted]
Don't Click It
21–30 of 44 posts
Re: Don't Click It
#22Very pretentious. Too much movement.
Re: Don't Click It
#23Can someone please correct the title so I don't have to stare at crappy english at the top of my HN page?
Re: Don't Click It
#24I like the idea to reduce clicking, but eliminating it seems to create more confusion than easiness. On the other side, maybe it will be cool to have a mouse which doesn't need force to click- maybe that would reduce RSI (I am not specialist and cannot say for sure). For example what if the mouse had touchpad instead of buttons?
Re: Don't Click It
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
urm, I dont see what that has to do with the scroll gestures, unless you count swiping your finger across the screen as "clicking", which it isnt
You're sort of right, but not in the direction you think you are. Finger swipes and gestures carry more information than clicking. The entire point of the clickless interface is for the user to convey less information that clicking; as I've referred to it in another context, the author believes that the solution to the problems of "point and grunt" interfaces is to reduce it to a "point" interface. Modern mouse inter…
its getting late so cant reply properly, but
I dont believe the clickless interface is trying to make the user convey less information, but instead its trying to interpret information the user is already conveying in a smarter way, so they dont have to produce redundant information (the clicks).
Im sure I know of one or two good uses of this in practice, but its late and they arent coming to me right now.
Re: Don't Click It
#26I was at the Maker Faire last Saturday and there was a company that had a true multi-touch screen that was very large ( something like 20" ). I can see how this would be useful when using a touch interface: I would not want to tap the screen. Great work!
Re: Don't Click It
#27Interesting site, but I really cannot understand why the mouse click is a "bad" thing. Having pages do nothing unless you explicitly click is a great thing, that site showed me exactly how annoying it can be to control an interface that wants to rearrange itself all the time based on mouse movements. Moving the mouse to a link and having the link move AWAY because you happened to move across one of the links between…
They're not suggesting click is bad. It's the equivalent of link-bait: An excuse to get you to try their mouse-over.
...which I consider annoying eye-candy. Eye candy that melt and drips uncontrollably for that matter. For me the reaction is more like the other who complained of motion sickness. For this user, please leave menu bars static (unless you're expanding content: like drop-down or slide-out menus). I'd rather have flashing, hopping ads in my peripheral vision (which I can tune out), that menus zipping around like eye-floaters.
[Sorry, maybe you caught me in a bad mood, but my mood tends to become bad when purposeless complexity (especially moving) intrudes.]
Re: Don't Click It
#28This would work a lot better if the mouse pointer was hidden when not in motion.
The problem I had with it was when I moved my mouse to read the text underneath the pointer, I would occasionally leave the target area and have it disappear out from under me.
Re: Don't Click It
#29One day I hope I'll be able to "natively" browse the internet, graphics, videos and all... in a terminal window, or, something fully compatible with Vim/Emacs bindings.
Like vimperator? I use it, and I love it. In fact, I'm thinking about moving to a windows manager such as awesome or Xmonad for a completely mouseless experience.
Vimperator - http://vimperator.mozdev.org
Awesome - http://awesome.naquadah.org/
Xmonad - http://www.xmonad.org
Re: Don't Click It
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're sort of right, but not in the direction you think you are. Finger swipes and gestures carry more information than clicking. The entire point of the clickless interface is for the user to convey less information that clicking; as I've referred to it in another context, the author believes that the solution to the problems of "point and grunt" interfaces is to reduce it to a "point" interface. Modern mouse inter…
its getting late so cant reply properly, but I dont believe the clickless interface is trying to make the user convey less information, but instead its trying to interpret information the user is already conveying in a smarter way, so they dont have to produce redundant information (the clicks). Im sure I know of one or two good uses of this in practice, but its late and they arent coming to me right now.
"I dont believe the clickless interface is trying to make the user convey less information,"
This is a matter of information theory. It is an objective fact that only moving a mouse provides less information than a mouse that can also click. That is also why using this inferface is slower than using a conventional interface; you have to convey the same number of bits, but you have a smaller bandwidth to do it in. It is also, now that I think about it, a relatively decent explanation of why I consider this demoware; cutting down the bandwidth from human to computer certainly does have the effect of simplifying the interface, but only by slowing the user down and constraining the amount of information that can be extracted from the user. Throw this interface at a real problem with even more bits needing to be extracted from the user and the problems and slowdown will only compound. I don't think that most of us are looking to be slowed down.
In that entire paragraph, only that last sentence is opinion. The rest is a very simple application of information theory.
If you feel like you have to argue with that fact, I suggest brushing up on your information theory first. I'm not kidding about the objective fact bit. If you'd like to argue that interfaces should be based on reducing the amount of information extracted from the user, feel free, that is a conceivable argument, but it certainly flies in the face of experience and current interface developments.
(By the way, why am I being so harsh? It's education, albeit more for the audience than anybody else. Liking this interface as art is great, heck even I think it's sort of cool that way, but thinking it's actually a useful revolution is a sign that you are applying very weak thought processes to the idea, and it's helpful to see things like the simple application of information theory to the topic.)