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

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#91

Post by reagency » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 5:26 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #10

EDIT: disabled zoom? It's weird to me that Google fails, hard, on so many ui things. Here's one example from the Gmail app on iOS, from the feedback screen. http://imgur.com/a/koKRb The [done] button is where the [return] button usually is; and it's directly over the [send] button. So if you don't notice that return is now done, and tap it twice to get a new paragraph, you just sent your unfinished feedback. I blame…

Google puts a lot of time and money into copy Apple UI and then overdoing it, not into building a usable UI.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#92

Post by reagency » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 5:28 PM UTC

thoman23 wrote: post #2

These are always useful reminders. It's easy to get so lost in designing a system that you forget the perspective of the user, which is what really matters. One of my current favorites is Rocksmith (guitar learning software), where upon exiting you are prompted with "Do you wish to continue? Yes/No". You as the user need to essentially state, "Yes, I would like to continue...exiting the program". This is right next t…

Apple's HIG from THIRTY years ago say to not use Yes/No in dialogs.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#93

Post by reagency » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 5:34 PM UTC

steveax wrote: post #43

taspeotis wrote: post #15

A bit dated, but relevant: http://interfacehallofshame.eu/www.iarchitect.com/lotus.htm And its complement: http://hallofshame.gp.co.at/fame.htm

We really have gotten better (and expectations are higher). Remember the abominable multi-row tab control dialogs common in Windows apps [1] shudder. Does anyone remember Debabelizer? [2] Really amazing piece of software with an interface that, ummm, well, here's the batch catalog setup dialog [3] [1]: http://interfacehallofshame.eu/www.iarchitect.com/tabs.htm [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Theurer [3]: http…

What's wrong with 3? It has a lot of options because the user needs control. They are well organized.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#94

Post by reagency » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 5:34 PM UTC

steveax wrote: post #43

taspeotis wrote: post #15

A bit dated, but relevant: http://interfacehallofshame.eu/www.iarchitect.com/lotus.htm And its complement: http://hallofshame.gp.co.at/fame.htm

We really have gotten better (and expectations are higher). Remember the abominable multi-row tab control dialogs common in Windows apps [1] shudder. Does anyone remember Debabelizer? [2] Really amazing piece of software with an interface that, ummm, well, here's the batch catalog setup dialog [3] [1]: http://interfacehallofshame.eu/www.iarchitect.com/tabs.htm [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Theurer [3]: http…

What's wrong with 3? It has a lot of options because the user needs control. They are well organized.

Re: Recognising a Bad User Interface at First Glance

#95

Post by dragonwriter » Fri, Jul 03, 2015, 5:37 PM UTC

reagency wrote: post #92

thoman23 wrote: post #2

These are always useful reminders. It's easy to get so lost in designing a system that you forget the perspective of the user, which is what really matters. One of my current favorites is Rocksmith (guitar learning software), where upon exiting you are prompted with "Do you wish to continue? Yes/No". You as the user need to essentially state, "Yes, I would like to continue...exiting the program". This is right next t…

Apple's HIG from THIRTY years ago say to not use Yes/No in dialogs.

The real problem wasn't just Yes/No, it was "Continue" to mean Exit (Continue exiting). Which would have been just as bad if the verb from the question were pushed into the options, as "Do you want to continue? ", where "Continue" still means, as in the question, "continue exiting" and "Stop" means "stop exiting".

"Do you want to exit? " would improve what was presented, though, yes, "Do you want to exit? " would be better. But it was the question more than the manner that the responses were presented that was the problem.