Live data from Hacker News

Toasts are bad UX

maxschmitt.me

151–160 of 401 posts

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#151
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snackbars aren't toasts

do you have a source for that? I understand that Toast is the name given in Android

> Note that Snackbars are preferred for brief messages while the app is in the foreground.

https://developer.android.com/reference/android/widget/Toast

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been a developer (primarily back end) and I never heard the term toast until now. Perhaps I’m just simple, or maybe I stopped paying attention after “hamburger menu.” I’m probably too old to hang out with the cool kids anymore.

As a developer who started with jQuery and then Backbone.js it seems like frontend dev has become very rich but at the same time has developed some weird esoteric rituals and practices which don't seem to go with conventional software engineering.

I'm curious as to how you're defining 'conventional software engineering' here; can you give some examples of things that are not conventional software engineering in the front end?

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#154
post #152

Good piece. I've experienced this in many contexts, and widescreen monitors make it a bigger problem.

Toasts which incorporate movement such as slide up are far more noticeable compared to fade in toasts since human vision is far better at recognizing movement. Even on large screens it is pretty good.

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#155

I'm not convinced. Most of the argument seems to be that redundant UX is bad UX: > But by archiving the email, the email disappears from the list, which already implies the action was successful. > In this example, the button already includes a confirmation so the toast is entirely unnecessary. I vehemently disagree with the idea that just because you're already communicating something one way it's bad UX to include…

No, they're bad. Messages that are on the periphery of my vision/attention (imagine a widescreen monitor) are actively confusing. I'm working on THIS problem here and something flashes up over there. Half the time, as I refocus to read this annoying intrusion, it disappears.

It's bad UX. Put your damned messages where my attention has already been directed to BY YOUR UI.

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#156
post #76

For anyone as confused as I was, this article is not about toasted bread [1], but about a type of UI widget [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toast_(food) [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Toast_(computing)

It's ironic that a person writing about poor communication paradigms didn't explain what "toast" means here.

It's the most important word on their page, and it's obvious that some people, even technically-minded folks, don't understand the jargon.

But could be they got extra engagement from readers who are interested in baking and breakfast recipes?

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#157
The number of people and voracity that toasts are being defended in this thread is quite surprising given how terrible of a UI element they are. They don't exist anywhere in the document hierarchy so users have to mentally piece together what they're connected to, they carry no context, and they happen long (in computer time) after the action that that caused them.

Toasts are a solution to "I did something async and don't know how to design an actually good UI to convey that." And having a UI element for that is pretty darn useful because of how often that situation comes up. All of our default UI metaphors buttons/checkboxes/input boxes are all synchronous— either updating local state to be saved synchronously with a button or synchronously in real time (like setting a preference cookie). It's just that the web forced async-by-default on everyone without updating anything else.

If you show a user a checkbox it's absurd that such a thing can fail or not apply immediately, you're emulating a paper form, how does checking a box fail? Same with flipping a switch. Even if the light doesn't come on the switch is still flipped. None of these elements make sense to be backed by a request/response.

In the example in the article when the user changes one of their settings a save button appears, when you click it there's a progress bar or spinner, and when it finishes it says "Saved!" We figured this out in Windows 95. Quit trying to hide the form submission. The need for toasts is trying to tell you your abstraction is leaking.

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree on that—in the YouTube example specifically this isn't necessarily a problem, but the toast serves a valuable purpose in the archive in that it tells you again which button it was that you pressed. There have been countless times in cases like that where the toast has saved me and allowed me to undo a misclick. I can see the argument that there are certain places where people use toasts that are unnecessar…

Toasts also give you a good place to put other shortcuts like “Item updated. [View item]” that make it much easier to act on state changes, like navigate to sensible places to view / react to those changes.

All of that is inacessible.

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#159
post #86
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you worked with an old person? Redundancy in UX confuses them. The closer you can get to the whole UI being a single sentence and two buttons the better.

Have you? Things disappearing with insufficient explicit feedback for what actually happened to the things is one of the most common issues I've encountered with older computer users. I think it's the most common issue. Toasts add persistency and visibility for users who barely or don't understand the UIs they're interacting with, which makes it easier to understand what happened. If Outlook gave feedback to every us…

> Things disappearing with insufficient explicit feedback

Toasts appear somewhere in the corner and then disappear very quickly. Not sure how useful that feedback is. It's distracting at best.

Re: Toasts are bad UX

#160

There things worse than toasts: hidden slide panels. They are basically hidden toasts that are necessary for some actions and are completely unintuitive, unfindable and undiscoverable. My worst experience was with waze using the cellphone of someone else; I had to do something (don't remember what) and just stared at the screen (like a retard) trying to guess what I had to do; the person eventually got the phone, sli…

I think the slide left/right for sidebar is a nice UX, as long as the user knows about it, and as long as you don't go beyond 1 main + 2 sidebars.

Discord mobile app used to have it for both left and right sidebars, and then a while ago someone had a brilliant idea that the "slide to reply" gesture was more important than navigating the app, and now you have to click a tiny ambiguous button to see the right sidebar.

Post reply on HN