Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
particletree.com
Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
1–10 of 37 posts
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#2And after you've read that, give yourself The Quiz!
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#3Clicks edge of screen above NetworkManager icon ... Confirms it's still broken in XFCE 4.
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#4Laws of UX has a nice overview of the different laws that exist in user experience! Fitt's law: https://lawsofux.com/fittss-law
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#5Clicks edge of screen above NetworkManager icon ... Confirms it's still broken in XFCE 4.
NetworkManager icon is not in Notification Area?
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#6IIRC this is one of the reasons the UI on the Mac opted for a fixed context-dependant menu bar at the top of the screen instead of the per-window one used by Windows (and Java).
It's basically 'fling your pointing device at the top' and 'go left or right to get the button you want'. Due to the lack of borders/stops, this would be harder if it was sandwiched between a titlebar and window content.
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#7IIRC this is one of the reasons the UI on the Mac opted for a fixed context-dependant menu bar at the top of the screen instead of the per-window one used by Windows (and Java). It's basically 'fling your pointing device at the top' and 'go left or right to get the button you want'. Due to the lack of borders/stops, this would be harder if it was sandwiched between a titlebar and window content.
It was. I wonder, though: with modern monitor sizes, does that make as much sense as it did with a 9", 512×342 screen?
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#8How does this work with radial menus and touch interfaces?
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#9IIRC this is one of the reasons the UI on the Mac opted for a fixed context-dependant menu bar at the top of the screen instead of the per-window one used by Windows (and Java). It's basically 'fling your pointing device at the top' and 'go left or right to get the button you want'. Due to the lack of borders/stops, this would be harder if it was sandwiched between a titlebar and window content.
It was. I wonder, though: with modern monitor sizes, does that make as much sense as it did with a 9", 512×342 screen?
Depends on two things:
1. How fast can you get the pointer to the menu?
2. How easy is it to get the right item?
If you have a "large" screen, I would contend that having a dedicated menu button on your mouse/trackpad/trackball/pen is the best possible thing for any user who isn't a complete novice. Don't wave the pointer somewhere else, make the menu come to you.
If you can't do that for whatever reason, then having a high-acceleration pointer that can be flung all the way against an edge is next best. Going back to where you were, though, will be relatively hard.
Re: Visualizing Fitts's Law (2007)
#10IIRC this is one of the reasons the UI on the Mac opted for a fixed context-dependant menu bar at the top of the screen instead of the per-window one used by Windows (and Java). It's basically 'fling your pointing device at the top' and 'go left or right to get the button you want'. Due to the lack of borders/stops, this would be harder if it was sandwiched between a titlebar and window content.
You can however also argue against having such a global menubar with Fitts's Law, as it means that other UI elements can't be placed at the screen edge, such as the min/max/close-buttons (though there are also concepts where those are global, too) and nowadays also browser tabs.