Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance • Hacker News Board

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#21

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 1:14 AM UTC

navait wrote: post #13

userbinator wrote: post #9

I agree with some of the points (like ambiguous icons and vague error messages), but not all of them. ‘If you are an X, then you have to fill in Y and Z. If you are not an X, please only fill in Z, unless Z=1, then you should fill Y too.’ This could be simplified considerably: "Fill in Z. If you are X or Z=1, fill in Y." Although I'm not surprised that refactoring boolean expressions is something that a lot of people…

Literacy and user interfaces are not related. Literacy is a tool people use to record and transmit information, which in turn allows people to learn and improve themselves. Software is meant to accomplish a task, the UI being the way you explain to the computer I don't care much about the process of how paper and bindings are made, I just want to be able to read my book. Most users prefer the software just do what th…

[deleted]

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#22

Post by userbinator » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 1:16 AM UTC

andygmb wrote: post #4

>Use of image-only icons/buttons that have no distinctive meaning There's nothing worse than this, along with no alt-text on web pages. With font-icons being so common nowadays, designers want to remove all text and revert back to hieroglyphics.

I've heard it expressed this way: "A picture is worth a thousand words, but there are times when a single word will do."

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#23

Post by kazinator » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 1:19 AM UTC

vixsomnis wrote: post #12

As someone who hasn't worked in the software industry yet, stories like these are beginning to horrify me. Is the bar really this low?

Yes -- but only by default! If you go to Tools -> Page Setup -> Zoom -> Sidebar -> Tweaks, and then click on [+] next to Polling Interval to expand the box, a "Bar:" property appears, where you can enter a lower number to set the bar lower. Or just use the arrow buttons next to the field to increase or decrease it. (But note that if you already typed a number, and then use the buttons, it increments from the old number that was overwritten, not from what you typed. (Bugzilla item dating back to 2006, status UNCONFIRMED.))

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#24

Post by teej » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 1:23 AM UTC

[deleted] wrote: post #21

navait wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literacy and user interfaces are not related. Literacy is a tool people use to record and transmit information, which in turn allows people to learn and improve themselves. Software is meant to accomplish a task, the UI being the way you explain to the computer I don't care much about the process of how paper and bindings are made, I just want to be able to read my book. Most users prefer the software just do what th…

[deleted]

Communication, not literacy.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#25

Post by woofyman » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 1:51 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #22

andygmb wrote: post #4

>Use of image-only icons/buttons that have no distinctive meaning There's nothing worse than this, along with no alt-text on web pages. With font-icons being so common nowadays, designers want to remove all text and revert back to hieroglyphics.

I've heard it expressed this way: "A picture is worth a thousand words, but there are times when a single word will do."

You don't have to localize icons which is a feature.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#26

Post by TheLoneWolfling » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 1:53 AM UTC

> Unneeded use of separating lines, grouping boxes,.. less of these = easier on the eye.

I seriously disagree with this particular assertion. I find that "flat" design trends make things much less usable, and this is no exception. It is far easier to group things with visual references than with lack-of-visual-references. And it is far easier to find things like buttons if there are, say, actual indications that they are buttons.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#27

Post by TheLoneWolfling » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 1:58 AM UTC

woofyman wrote: post #25

userbinator wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard it expressed this way: "A picture is worth a thousand words, but there are times when a single word will do."

You don't have to localize icons which is a feature.

People think, naively, that you don't need to localize icons. And yet a lot of the time icons should be localized.

Or rather:

You can design an icon that doesn't need to be localized. But unless you design for it, it very well may need to be localized.

Things like thumbs-up/down, any sort of animal icon... Even trash cans.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#28

Post by coldtea » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 2:09 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #9

I agree with some of the points (like ambiguous icons and vague error messages), but not all of them. ‘If you are an X, then you have to fill in Y and Z. If you are not an X, please only fill in Z, unless Z=1, then you should fill Y too.’ This could be simplified considerably: "Fill in Z. If you are X or Z=1, fill in Y." Although I'm not surprised that refactoring boolean expressions is something that a lot of people…

>This could be simplified considerably: "Fill in Z. If you are X or Z=1, fill in Y.".

If I have to solve an equation to user your app, a) I won't, b) It's badly designed.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#29

Post by userbinator » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 2:35 AM UTC

woofyman wrote: post #25

userbinator wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've heard it expressed this way: "A picture is worth a thousand words, but there are times when a single word will do."

You don't have to localize icons which is a feature.

A "feature"?

I'd consider doing things just to make development a little easier at the expense of many users' ability to operate the UI is most certainly a bug and not a feature.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#30

Post by sopooneo » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 2:35 AM UTC

TheLoneWolfling wrote: post #26

> Unneeded use of separating lines, grouping boxes,.. less of these = easier on the eye. I seriously disagree with this particular assertion. I find that "flat" design trends make things much less usable, and this is no exception. It is far easier to group things with visual references than with lack-of-visual-references. And it is far easier to find things like buttons if there are, say, actual indications that they…

There's a balance to be struck. The pendulum may have swung too far towards the minimalist, but it used to be much more common to have lines and boxes around everything, where simply removing them and leaving open space made the layout easier to quickly grasp.