Re: UI design [was Owen Taylor's paper]

On Thu, 2002-09-19 at 16:49, Gerald Henriksen wrote:
> Now with A the no option would be the left button, but with
> application B the no option is the right button.
> 
> Now if you strictly use either Gnome2 applications or KDE applications
> then this will not be an issue.  You will after a short while
> instinctively know whether to click on the left or right button as is
> appropriate for your chosen desktop.

instinctively....thats the problem...should you be operating a computer
on instinct.  Okay I can see a jet fighter pilot needing to operate
things on instinct...everyone else can take a second and read the
text...or parse the icon graphic and think about what they are doing
when they are using the computer.  How do people ever use something like
cruise control or wind shield wipers in a car without running off the
road...its not like that placement is standardized.  No instead the
cruise control and windshield wiper knobs have visual hinting...symbols
or text...so you can find it. Gas pedals and accelerators...since you
cant see them are like keyboard bindings and need to be somewhat
standardize...because you have no visual hinting before you go to use
them.  UI layout need not be so formalized that everybody is developing
to the same layout standard across every application...there needs to be
room for different opinions and customization.  The best possible answer
is to have the toolset have themable layout chracteristics so the
applications developers dont have to think about it...but the end user
can set up the pedestrian UI layout issue like dialog button order in a
consistant way across toolkits like they like them....but until then
different toolkits are going to coesist with different layouts....and
frankly this whole UI consistancy across all the applications debate is
pointless.....its about the applications...not about UI
consistancy...thats whats going to get redhat on the
desktop....applications....depth and breath of applications...brandname
games...brandname productivity tools....and mature opensource
applications to compete in the same space as the brandname stuff and
drive cost of ownership further down in the long run.....you really
think MS has its marketshare because of UI integration?  If that were so
mac would have won the marketplace early on.  MS won on cost of
ownership...and number of applications.  

> The possibility of the user "accidentally" deleting something has now
> increased dramatically because the user has been provided with a
> desktop that knowingly uses 2 different UI layouts and yet has on
> purpose removed any visual clues.
Has redhat removed the visual clues...do the buttons still say
okay/cancel....do the menu items still have text....you dont NEED to
know its kde to read a dialog button.  careless...instinctive actions
usually lead to accidents.  there are a reason the text and the icons
are there....if people can't take the time to read a button's text
before they push it god help them when they start having to use web
services like banking...oh god the login button on that webpage is in
the top right hand corner not the left.....these people certainly
shouldn't be allowed to vote in any election anywhere.  there is a
difference in simplifying a layout and dumbing one down.  If you are
working under the expectation that people WILL NOT READ visual hinting
on the buttons..then you are asking Redhat to dumb down the
desktop.....and that is wrong.  What Redhat is doing is simplifiying the
desktop as much as they can...by reducing the number of apps in the
menus...by using the best applications (in their opinion) as the
defaults...by stripping out unneeded information and confusing branding
icons....this UI consistancy argument you present is built on the
assumption that users are stupid and degrading. Following this "the user
is stupid" logic would lead us to the tragic one-button mouse concept in
quick order.  That cannot be allowed to happen. How the hell am I going
to play castle wolf with a one button mouse...ugh.

If placement and layout were critical to operations...there would be no
visual hinting...hell we could all just run everything via keyboard
shortcut combos.....but they aren't critical and were never meant to be
critical...thats why we have icons and text next to buttons and menu
items...to inform you before you click.  If you choose to ignore the
visual hints...its your problem and your choice to not pay attention.  

-jef

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQA9ike5rWLDmRitRZURAhuNAKChcZnemrOeujPS94J+fB98MsZLmACggs2p
X9/1WucesR+XIRi2rjBeP5Q=
=5tV+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----