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…
Toasts are bad UX
61–70 of 401 posts
Re: Toasts are bad UX
#62How about just getting rid of all food related jargon; salad bars, burgers, toasts, heroes etc.? As a backend developer this stuff is mind-boggling, just call it "notification widget", or a "confirmation widget" etc. Try explaining what toast is to an Indian subcontractor who has never eaten toasted bread in their life and then apply that to the UX usecase. Removing these terms will also improve accessibility and und…
While we're at it let's remove the jargon from other trades, too. "P-trap" is a confusing word that plumbers use, we should instead have them say "gas barrier". And the word "fuse" makes very little sense in an electrical context—try explaining to someone who's never seen a stick of dynamite why the "overcurrent stopper" is named after a long gunpowder-infused cord! Traffic engineers shouldn't refer to "groups of car…
Your example of a "P-trap" is good but its not like plumbers are going around saying, get me the "slinky hotdog" to bend a copper pipe, or you need a "banoffee pie" to seal this joint.
Re: Toasts are bad UX
#63I'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…
I use a computer mainly by using a zoom tool to magnify the area around my text and mouse/finger cursoe. I miss almosst all toasts and most notifications because they not where I’m working. For my use case, feed near the item I’m interacting with is the only valuable feedback.
Wanted to mention in case you're not aware and maybe there's some tool somewhere (or some way to configure a screen reader?) so that you can keep your simple zoom workflow but still benefit from the ARIA alert pattern.
Re: Toasts are bad UX
#64How about just getting rid of all food related jargon; salad bars, burgers, toasts, heroes etc.? As a backend developer this stuff is mind-boggling, just call it "notification widget", or a "confirmation widget" etc. Try explaining what toast is to an Indian subcontractor who has never eaten toasted bread in their life and then apply that to the UX usecase. Removing these terms will also improve accessibility and und…
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.
Re: Toasts are bad UX
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
While we're at it let's remove the jargon from other trades, too. "P-trap" is a confusing word that plumbers use, we should instead have them say "gas barrier". And the word "fuse" makes very little sense in an electrical context—try explaining to someone who's never seen a stick of dynamite why the "overcurrent stopper" is named after a long gunpowder-infused cord! Traffic engineers shouldn't refer to "groups of car…
I get your reasoning but still why use food terms for jargon in UX instead of something else. Your example of a "P-trap" is good but its not like plumbers are going around saying, get me the "slinky hotdog" to bend a copper pipe, or you need a "banoffee pie" to seal this joint.
Re: Toasts are bad UX
#66I'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…
A toast makes sense as a worst-case, last-gasp, no-context attempt to communicate with a user. In this example, if the user unchecked a playlist and dismissed the list of playlists while the save was happening, and then the save failed, a toast makes sense because the context of the action is gone. Might as well put the information at a random spot on the screen.
Even then, a toast probably isn't the best you can do, if you really want the user to understand the error. In a the-user-is-the-product adware application like YouTube, you probably don't care if the user misses errors like these (and might even prefer that they do), but in a business application you wouldn't want to gamble on the user missing the toast or confusing it with a different error. It might be more helpful for a normal user if you re-open the element and show them the error in context. Open up the list of playlists and animate something to draw their attention to the fact that their change didn't save. I'm probably getting pie in the sky here, because that sounds really difficult to do in a systematic way, but in an ideal world, you'd always see errors in context.
Re: Toasts are bad UX
#67Toasts are bad UX for an app which is used in a casual context, yes. The odds that an untrained user missed them and becomes confused are quite high. But there is nothing wrong with a toast in a pro app. The pro user will get used to where feedback comes from on the screen and find it is second nature to notice the toast. In practice, there are very few UX principles that generalize across every interface.
I will say as someone with a limited visual field, toasts are very frustrating as they're almost always out of my field of view. Please keep indicators/notifications close to the thing that caused it.
This is 10x more subtle than any toast.
Do you wish that were different? Or does that work for you?
Re: Toasts are bad UX
#68I'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…
I use a computer mainly by using a zoom tool to magnify the area around my text and mouse/finger cursoe. I miss almosst all toasts and most notifications because they not where I’m working. For my use case, feed near the item I’m interacting with is the only valuable feedback.
Re: Toasts are bad UX
#69Re: Toasts are bad UX
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get your reasoning but still why use food terms for jargon in UX instead of something else. Your example of a "P-trap" is good but its not like plumbers are going around saying, get me the "slinky hotdog" to bend a copper pipe, or you need a "banoffee pie" to seal this joint.
Why does it matter to you where the jargon came from? Why are vaguely shape-related jargon and military-derived jargon and acronyms okay but you draw the line at toast?
For example in Google
"toast"
"toast menu"
"toast ux"
All yield different results
However "p-trap" gets you a narrowed list of results