Live data from Hacker News

Free software scares normal people

danieldelaney.net

481–490 of 641 posts

Re: Free software scares normal people

#481

Good article, but the reasoning is wrong. It isn't easy to make a simple interface in the same way that Pascal apologized for writing a long letter because he didn't have time to write a shorter one. Implementing the UI for one exact use case is not much trouble, but figuring out what that use case is difficult. And defending that use case from the line of people who want "that + this little extra thing", or the "I j…

Simplicity isn't just a design challenge, it's a discipline problem

Re: Free software scares normal people

#482
post #121

Good article, but the reasoning is wrong. It isn't easy to make a simple interface in the same way that Pascal apologized for writing a long letter because he didn't have time to write a shorter one. Implementing the UI for one exact use case is not much trouble, but figuring out what that use case is difficult. And defending that use case from the line of people who want "that + this little extra thing", or the "I j…

It always amazes me how even just regular every day users will come to me with something like this: Overly simplified example: "Can you make this button do X?" where the existing button in so many ways is only distantly connected to X. And then they get stuck on the idea that THAT button has to be where the thing happens, and they stick with it even if you explain that the usual function of that button is Y. I simpli…

In general the advice I've heard it that users are absolutely going to be right about when there's a problem (which you ignore at your peril), they can usually identify where the problem is, but they are terrible at coming up with ways to fix it.

Re: Free software scares normal people

#483

Good article, but the reasoning is wrong. It isn't easy to make a simple interface in the same way that Pascal apologized for writing a long letter because he didn't have time to write a shorter one. Implementing the UI for one exact use case is not much trouble, but figuring out what that use case is difficult. And defending that use case from the line of people who want "that + this little extra thing", or the "I j…

Not only is it hard to figure out the use-case, but the correct use-case will change over time. If this were made in the iPod touch era, it would probably make 240p files for maximum compatibility. That's ... probably the wrong setting for today.

Simplicity has an expiration date if it's too rigid

Re: Free software scares normal people

#485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't fall into the trap of responding to the user's request to do Y a certain way. They are asking you to implement Y, and they think they know how it should be implemented, but really they would be happy with Y no matter how you did it. https://xyproblem.info/

On the other hand, I've not uncommonly seen this idea misused: Alice asks for Y, Bob says that it's an XY problem and that Alice really wants to solve a more general problem X with solution Z, Alice says that Z doesn't work for her due to some detail of her problem, Bob browbeats Alice over "If you think Z won't work, then you're wrong, end of story", and everyone argues back and forth over Z instead of coming up wit…

Yes, often an issue on stackoverflow. It's one of the reasons why it can be frustrating to use as you get more experienced: if an expert is at the point of asking on stackoverflow they're probably doing something at least a little bit unusual! But people who answer on stackoverflow mostly see questions from less experienced people and so default to operating in that mode.

I generally try to answer the Y but also indicate that it suggests there may be an X that could be better achieved some other way, and mention Z if I'm reasonably confident in what X is. It might increase the chance that the person asking just does Y anyway even if Z would be better, but frankly that's not really my business.

Re: Free software scares normal people

#486
post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the "modal disruption" is misguided - he cites as the challenge a very poor implementation in a MS app where the modes were barely visible!!! That's not a proof that modes are bad, just a statement that invisible information makes it hard for the users to adapt! Brushes (another mode he cites as great) are great precisly because their state is immediately visible in your focus area - your primary pointer changes Now…

> wasted some space that could be used for information The space is used for information. The fact clips in Audacity finally have names and you can see those names is a fantastic improvement. The space taken up by the clip title is the handle.

Indeed, it's fantastic to see those useful

"Audio 1 #1" "Audio 1 #1" "Audio 1 #1"

"Audio 1 #1" "Audio 1 #1"

names replacing the audio wave height!

But sure, if you need names permanently right there and are ok to lose space to show them, and if the handle is inconveniently small to only fit the text, then yes, you wouldn't lose space in that case. You'd only have other issues.

But that coupling likely has other design implications, e.g., you're unlikely to get an option to only show names on hover instead of having a bar, or to show names as an overlay (in many cases the names aren't that long to need to take the height of the the whole segment)

Re: Free software scares normal people

#487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> creating good interfaces (for people that aren’t developers.) This is the part where people get excited about AI. I personally think they're dead wrong on the process, but strongly empathize with that end goal. Giving people the power to make the interfaces they need is the most enduring solution to this issue. We had attempts like HyperCard or Delphi, or Access forms. We still get Excel forms, Google forms etc. Ha…

I have nightmare stories to tell of Access Forms from my time dealing with them in the 90's. The usual situation is that the business department hires someone with a modicum of talent or interest in tech, who then uses Access to build an application that automates or helps with some aspect of the department's work. They then leave (in a couple of cases these people were just interns) and the IT department is then cal…

Imagine taking a shit on a technology platform which made it easy for interns with zero experience to successfully automate key aspects of business processes!

Love the assumption "when it inevitably goes wrong." In real life, many of these applications work perfectly for years and assist employees tremendously. The program doesnt fail, but the business changes - new products, locations, marketing, payment types, inventory systems, tons of potential things.

And yes, after the original author is gone, nobody is left to update the program. Of course, a lot of programmers or IT folks probably could update it, but ew, why learn and write Access when we can create a new React app with microservices-based backend including Postgres in the cloud and spin up a Kubernetes cluster to run it.

Re: Free software scares normal people

#488
post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See, I feel this is where programmers just don't "get" good UI design. Photoshop is good UI design. A normie can use photoshop the same way they use MS paint. Albeit it just loads slower. A normie doesn't need all the bells and whistles. They can just use photoshop like a glorified MS paint. You can't do that with GIMP. It's actually really fucking annoying, if you try to use GIMP to do a MS paint job.

Clearly this is not true. Photoshop is difficult to use. I have opened it and tried to use it many times. Its UI is super complicated. There are endless buttons and I have no idea how to do anything. There are heaps of Photoshop tutorials on YouTube, which wouldn't be necessary if what you said were true. I used GIMP to do MS paint stuff years ago when I used it fairly regularly. GIMP is always a whipping boy for UI…

> If you want to see bad UI design a much better example is something like Visual Studio. What a mess.

Yeah, big button "Create project" and another, albeit smaller, button for "Run" puts a really high bar for the user to jump over.

Nothin as good as plain old cc followed by a bunch of cryptic flags.

Re: Free software scares normal people

#489

Good article, but the reasoning is wrong. It isn't easy to make a simple interface in the same way that Pascal apologized for writing a long letter because he didn't have time to write a shorter one. Implementing the UI for one exact use case is not much trouble, but figuring out what that use case is difficult. And defending that use case from the line of people who want "that + this little extra thing", or the "I j…

Yes. I think the crux of good interface design is coming up with a model that is simple and flexible enough to be understood by the user but also allow them to achieve their goals by composing operations and options, as opposed to special-casing each possible use-case. This allows you to address the needs of a large number of users without drowning in complexity, but it's really hard to come up with the right model and in general if there's something that will make you unpopular with your users it's changing around the UI after they've gotten used to it, so you don't really get to evolve this as the product develops.

(Commercial software is far from immune to this as well: professional tools like CAD are notoriously arcane and often have a huge number of special-purpose features, and they're not incentivised to improve their UI model because it would alienate their existing users, as well as not show up on the feature lists which are often used to drive purchasing decisions)

Re: Free software scares normal people

#490
post #315
post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a common misconception that the "expert" knows the best. Expert can be a trainee, or may be motivated to make more for its organisation or have yet to encounter your problem. On the other hand, if you are using your car for a decade and feel it needs a new belt - then get a new belt. Worst case scenario- you will lose some money but learn a bit more about an item you use everyday. Experts don't have your instin…

If you don't trust the expert then why are you asking them to fix your stuff? It's a weird idea that you'd want an idiot to do what you say because you know better.

If they're asking the mechanic to do X and they understand the mechanic is just doing X and NOT venturing to fix your problem. I guess that is fine.

I agree though it sets up a weird dynamic where folks might come back to the expert and complain a problem isn't fixed, but that's not what they asked for / they broke the typical expert and customer dynamic.

Post reply on HN