Common Usability Terms: pt. II: the Icon
Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 28th Oct 2007 16:55 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces This is the second article in a series on common usability and graphical user interface related terms [part I]. On the internet, and especially in forum discussions like we all have here on OSNews, it is almost certain that in any given discussion, someone will most likely bring up usability and GUI related terms - things like spatial memory, widgets, consistency, Fitts' Law, and more. The aim of this series is to explain these terms, learn something about their origins, and finally rate their importance in the field of usability and (graphical) user interface design. In part II today, we focus on the pictogramme, popularly known as the icon.
E-mail Print r 1   · Read More · 35 Comment(s) http://osne.ws/ejd
Thread beginning with comment 281458
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Ergonomics...
by Doc Pain on Sun 28th Oct 2007 20:18 UTC in reply to "Ergonomics..."
Doc Pain
Member since:
2006-10-08

Regarding the article: Very interesting, I had a good read.

Regarding your post:

"In general i don't understand why common desktop environments default to menu/task/whatnotbars horizontally aligned at the top and/or bottom of the screen. This is wasting space because they try to emulate paper which is even less fitting when your screen is not vertically oriented/pivoted into portrait mode."

As you can see from a screenshot in the article, the tradidional screen of the Xerox Alto was of Letter size, with "more height than width".

Today's screens have "more width than height", so I agree with you that many icon bars, stacked on top of each other, waste this ressource. Of course, the same is true for actual wide screen displays.

The available height decreases when big title bars, menu bars, many icon bars, status bars etc. are displayed. Remember: Height is the thing we have less of, compared to width. :-)

"So I did put my small taskbar vertically on the left side. Why not to the right?"

Just as a sidenote, I have set the dock in WindowMaker to be on the right side, 32x32 px each icon. This setting is the most comfortable I found since I started using WindowMaker as my primary WM in approx. 1997.

Furthermore, you can align icon bars vertically in some applications, which is very good when you do word processing and DTP - you see more of the content you're working on at one (without needing to use resize zoom functions). These icon bars can then be placed on the left side of the screen.

"Could be a matter of taste, on the other hand most menus in applications are on the left side, so i have to travel less with the pointer to get there."

This is a valid point: traveling distance to access GUI elements. Fortunaltely, I prefer using the keyboard for menu access so this doesn't matter to me; furthermore, I don't have to launch applications from the dock all the time. :-)

"I can't stand all that glitz, bling and glitter."

But in fact, that's what customers / users seem to be expecting, judging from the development of major desktop environments' design-

"I need to sit hours in front of that cybershit, be it work, be it digesting information, be it creating some."

As you surely will agree, that's not what most home users do: For them, it's entertainment at all, I assume. I'm belonging to the poor beings that are forced to use computers at work. :-)

And now for something completely different:

Tech Support: "All right...now double-click on the File Manager icon."
Customer: "That's why I hate this Windows -- because of the icons -- I'm a Protestant, and I don't believe in icons."
Tech Support: "Well, that's just an industry term sir. I don't believe it was meant to --"
Customer: "I don't care about any 'Industry Terms'. I don't believe in icons."
Tech Support: "Well...why don't you click on the 'little picture' of a file cabinet...is 'little picture' ok?"
Customer: [click]

:-)

http://www.rinkworks.com/stupid/cs_icons.shtml

Reply Parent Score: 3

Sophotect Member since:
2006-04-26

Interesting to see the distribution of Myers-Briggs personality types on that sort of site. Maybe that should be part of Usability/UI-Design too.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Ergonomics...
by alcibiades on Mon 29th Oct 2007 06:59 in reply to "RE: Ergonomics..."
alcibiades Member since:
2005-10-12

<blockquote>As you can see from a screenshot in the article, the traditional screen of the Xerox Alto was of Letter size, with "more height than width". </blockquote>

Very true. Modern screens are not really designed for writing - if they were, they would indeed be like the old Radius ones, pivotable to have the long dimension vertical. Or, if 24 inch or so, they would have an option to split into two panes showing continuous text.
Yes, you can do it with some text editors using tabs, kate is particularly nice in this respect. But its a struggle.

Its an interesting series this. Thom, I'm hoping you are going to do one of the next ones on the whole issue of the desktop metaphor and alternatives to it? Why the iconized desktop seems to be almost universal, though arguably it is less efficient than a good file manager in a separate desktop.

Reply Parent Score: 2