Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Jun 2012 12:19 UTC
Graphics, User Interfaces It's been one of my major pet peeves on both Android and iOS: the total and utter lack of consistency. Applications - whether first party or third party - all seem to live on islands, doing their own thing, making their own design choices regarding basic UI interactions, developing their own non-standard buttons and controls. Consistency died five years ago, and nobody seems to care but me.
Thread beginning with comment 522712
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: The Real World
by WereCatf on Mon 18th Jun 2012 18:51 UTC in reply to "The Real World"
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

Everything we use in the physical world has a UI specifically designed for it's purpose. Do you think that all door handles, should look the same no matter what house or building they are on? Do you think we should use door handles on cupboards, refrigerators, and cars too?


Poor analogy. Door handles actually tend to be very consistent within the set they belong to, ie. it would look extremely silly if every cupboard door et. al. in your kitchen had differently coloured, differently placed and differently shaped handles, wouldn't it? Similarly, in a house the doors that belong to a certain set, e.g. full-size doors meant to allow or disallow passage for humans, almost invariably share similar set of handles unless necessitated by outside requirements/restrictions.

In other words, there is actually a lot of consistency there and you just basically shot your own argument down. Consistency does *not* mean that everything must look and feel the same even if makes it harder for the user and/or task to accomplish a goal or a step to a goal.

Edited 2012-06-18 18:52 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: The Real World
by dtougas on Mon 18th Jun 2012 19:34 in reply to "RE: The Real World"
dtougas Member since:
2012-06-18

I think you missed my point. The article happened to spend a lot of time talking about how things look. To quote it here:

"Almost every application does things just a little bit differently, has elements in just a slightly different place, and looks just a bit different from everything else."

My point was that real world UI can be very different for similar actions. Cupboard doors and car doors are very different from UI standpoint, yet they essentially do the same thing - open a door. In some cases we twist a handle, in other cases we pull-up on a lever, and yet in others we just pull on a knob. There are doors of all sizes on all kinds of things, and they many of them can behave very differently. We don't expect everything in the real world to behave the same way, that would be ridiculous, so why do we expect that from our applications?

Edited 2012-06-18 19:35 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: The Real World
by zima on Tue 19th Jun 2012 13:19 in reply to "RE[2]: The Real World"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

My point was that real world UI can be very different for similar actions. Cupboard doors and car doors are very different from UI standpoint, yet they essentially do the same thing - open a door. [...] There are doors of all sizes on all kinds of things, and they many of them can behave very differently. We don't expect everything in the real world to behave the same way, that would be ridiculous

We do expect everything in the real world to behave the same way. All kinds of doors are very similar from UI standpoint, behave very alike. Real world UI is very similar for similar actions. There is very high consistency between many things we interact with on a daily basis.

BTW, we describe the rules and similarities in which physical objects work in real world under the physics umbrella term... (and while "common sense" physics is flawed, as evidenced for example by many silly ideas before Newtonian mechanics came along, it is close enough)

OTOH, computer displays don't have such limitations, and it often shows. Come on, look at the currently-trademark interactions on capacitive touchscreens, that of swiping things while barely exerting any pressure by your finger, enlarging them with two-finger-gesture, or grabbing and moving objects causing them to become "transparent" without much concern for any ~barriers in their path - virtually nothing works like that in the real world (yet of course we embraced those, we like them; but many other - not really)

Edited 2012-06-19 13:21 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2