Live data from Hacker News

Why isn't People-Centric UI Design taking off?

hanselman.com

71–78 of 78 posts

Re: Why isn't People-Centric UI Design taking off?

#71
The way he is talking about interaction is not people-centric, it is person-centric. If you are only ever communicating with one person at a time, then yes, opening up an individual person's contact details is probably the way to go, and for one-on-one text messages or phone calls this is how I communicate.

If I'm dealing with more than one person at a time, which is most of the time, I open up the application, whether it is facebook, twitter, email etc, and it allows me to view and communicate with multiple people in the medium that I choose.

Re: Why isn't People-Centric UI Design taking off?

#72
"click a picture of your friend and then contact them in any possible way using any enlisted app from there"

First, I think this is a good idea. We already do this with documents on our computer. Sometimes we launch Photoshop first, but other times we right-click on a document first, and choose "Open With...", then pick an application.

But I'd imagine third party developers wouldn't really like the idea of People equivalent of "Open With...", because that takes eyeballs away from their own contact list.

Re: Why isn't People-Centric UI Design taking off?

#74
I did have a windows phone and very much liked having my wife pinned to the home screen but she was the only one who made it. I wasn't interested in having a whole heap of other (less attractive) heads burning my retina all the time.

I am probably unusual but I find the whole social media/Skype scene quite tedious and I have closed all those accounts as time goes by. Excluding my wife, replies and others contacting me, I send about 2 personal emails a week, about 5 SMS a week, make about 10 personal phone calls a week and that's it. It simply doesnt justify a people centric UI.

Re: Why isn't People-Centric UI Design taking off?

#75

The article brings up a good point, sometimes it makes more sense to start with the person. For example, let's say I need to get in touch with my friend to quickly inform them of a change to our plans. Open Skype? Not online. Check Facebook, nope, they're not on. Messenger? Nope. Ok, I'll open my contact book, and get their number to call. Wouldn't it make more sense to simply select the person I'm trying to reach, a…

From the platform provider's point of view, it doesn't make business sense to offer features like this to an OS or to other apps. Someone like Facebook wants you to have to come to the experience (app, website) that they control, and that they monetize. Want to know if someone is online? Come to our app and find out. And maybe while you're here you'll browse your feed and see an ad or 2 (probably more like 10).

Yes, that's why I said they'd get less traffic, and not likely provide the information. However, you might be able to achieve the opposite.

Let's say on the iPhone, you could click a person's name, and attach their Twitter and HN handle. Now, you click their name a few dozen times a day when you go about your usual stalking to see all the new tweets and HN posts. You then follow these links to both Twitter and HN when something catches your eye. Facebook is now missing out. They didn't want to take part, because they wanted you to visit their app directly, but now, people are not taking the time to open their app. I can get 10 sources of information on my friend by clicking their name. Will I make a completely separate visit to Facebook to get their info? It's kind of a hassle, I might check those 10 sources with a simple click every hour, but only visit Facebook once a day because it's now more work. If Facebook was integrated, and I now had 11 sources of information just by clicking someone's name, I might start visiting Facebook more often by following these links.

Post reply on HN