Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 15th Jun 2012 08:04 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces It's just a tiny example, but it illustrates a far bigger problem. Adam Becker: "So what's the problem? It's that this innocuous little guy is now being used for all sorts of disparate purposes, and every time it's used for another action, it loses more and more of its meaning." This is what happens when consistency is thrown out the door, and developers get little to no guidance from operating systems' parent companies. Mobile applications and the web are a UX free-for-all, and as a result, established iconography and concepts are used out of context and in wildly varying ways. Just because you can code a mobile application doesn't mean you know anything about user interface design - this lack of guidance is where both Apple and Google have failed miserably.
Permalink for comment 522194
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by MOS6510
by daedalus on Fri 15th Jun 2012 10:47 UTC in reply to "Comment by MOS6510"
daedalus
Member since:
2011-01-14

And yet the Amiga was still more consistent than other platforms, with common shortcuts across the OS and programs, and consistently placed menus. I remember at the time being driven bonkers switching between DOS, Windows and the Amiga because of the inconsistencies of the former two. There were exceptions obviously, and they did annoy me a little bit - implementing your own close gadget on a window is just a waste of time IMHO, and comes with the added bonus of not responding as the standard one does.

I have to say it does bug me when applications use icons or gadgets which aren't reasonably standard for whatever platform. We have software in work which has toolbar icons which I couldn't actually describe if I tried, and have absolutely no relation that I can see to their function. That's just being awkward for the sake of it, similar functions in other applications seem to be able to do it!

Reply Parent Score: 1