Subscribe: Anonymous Usability Designer
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
context menu  corner  interaction  interface  menu  minimized windows  minimized  screen corner  screen  space  user  window  windows 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Anonymous Usability Designer

Anonymous Usability Designer

HCI is in its Stone Age

Updated: 2014-10-04T23:11:33.074-07:00


Vista designers – beware of dynamic information


I just watched an interview with Kam Vedbrat, a lead program manager on the AERO team which redesigned the User Interface of Windows Vista.

The interaction design industry needs a set of formulated rules. Really. Axioms describing the few do's and dont's that we actually know about, preventing old mistakes from being implemented over and over. After all, we're dealing with a science here.

I'm thinking of the window buttons (close, maximize, minimize) of the Vista calc(ulator) window: The actual options light up first when the user hovers the mouse pointer over the buttons.
Apple has almost the same mistake going (although not as severe) with the close, fit-to-content and minimize buttons of the aqua windows: The function of each button is revealed (although I wouldn't say apparent) first when the user hovers the mouse over these buttons.

The same design mistake can be found later in the interview, as Vedbrat demonstrates the Vista task bar: as he hovers over each task bar item, a minimized preview of the corresponding window is shown immediately above.

In this case, the ole' screen space excuse is noted into the log.


a user interface can be said to consist of two elements: information and information. One is static, and the other is dynamic.
If one of them is to take up more screen space than the other, it's the dynamic one: The location and content of minimized windows is constantly changing. What is constantly changing, is constantly harder to find (let this be an entry into that set of interaction axioms).
What's even worse is that minimizing yet another window will change the location of other, already minimized windows.

Besides, if what is said in the interview (about the amount of windows an average user uses) is true, namely four, screen real-estate really isn't a problem here. Although the Mac OS X (in?)famous dock also has its problems, it does show previews of each minimized window, constantly visualized. Good Apple. Now if only the minimized windows were to stack around their application icon somehow...

Monotonous interfaces and context menus


Among the top 8 (see below), point 5 seemed to have annoyed you the most. I shall clearify "our love of choice" further, starting by quoting myself: "[the GUI] would lack any settings /.../ related to changing the way you interact".

I think customization is a good thing, even necessary, as long as it's limited to aesthetics such as icons, wall papers, window backgrounds etc. Changing the way interaction takes place, however, isn't.
The reason is that in order for a user to reach an autonomous stage, the stage in which interaction doesn't require the user's full attention, interaction mustn't present any "ifs".

Compare this to pipelines in a CPU. As soon as an evaluation may result in a branch, the pipeline breaks. In the same sense, a user has no way of keeping one step ahead of her actions if her way is paved by trivial decisions.

Such a monotonous interface (Raskins terminology) has interesting consequences. Take your favourite file browser's context menu for instance. What if we removed every menu item that can be accomplished in any other way?
  • Double-click instead of Open
  • Drag to application icon instead of Open With...
  • Drag to desktop printer instead of Print
  • Move to trash instead of Move to trash (what were they thinking...?)
And so on.

Do this throughout the interface, and we will have obtained something cleaner (less-cluttered), with clear, atomic interaction metaphors. For a new user, the basic concepts of interactions would have to be learned: "send this document to the printer by dragging its icon onto the printer icon".

What could be in a context menu, according to my book, are options directly related to the document: manipulation of meta data. So I've put together a small example of how access privileges could be altered using a radial context menu (which unfortunately doesn't have too much to do with monotonous interfaces...).

The file's are below 400 kilobytes each:


Naturally, the example implies "Properties..." / "Get Info..." and the other menu items be removed from the file browser's menu.

(Sorry about the ads and stuff - if you know of a better file hosting service, drop a comment)

Top 8 Reasons HCI is in its Stone Age


1. Screen CornersLet me introduce you to one of the greatest mysteries of our time: After more than 20 years of research, development and competition in the field of HCI, not one single leading operating system developing company has come up with an OS that utilizes the four corners of the screen. Any five-year-old earth child has probably already figured out that the screen corners are the easiest points to hit - the only locations hittable without looking. Ray Charles figured that out. Stevie Wonder figured that out. And they would probably make a better design team than any money-driven market thugs.It gets better: The irony is that we argue about whether systems should be application-centered or document-centered, probably the two most important entities in a computer. Have you ever seen a system which lets you, out-of-the-box, hit a corner in order to do anything at all even remotely related to anything having anything at all to do with a document or application? So maybe documents aren't the most important entity in a computer. Browse the internet by hitting the screen corner? Check mail in the screen corner? Get Info in the screen corner? System preferences in the screen corner? Switching applications in the screen corner? No, or, well. In Mac OS X you can trigger Exposé by hitting a screen corner, although Exposé rhymes bad with point six below, so that hardly counts.2. OS GUI's are Designed for Beginners.Ooooh. there's nothing wrong with that, as long as you can grow with your user interface. Problem is, we outgrow it in a matter of hours, and after that the OS is nothing but a nail in the eye, a cow in the car, a space tit, a belly-barn shackle in the reunion of unjustified friends. Just something you have to hazzle with. So is it possible to design a system that's suits both beginners and professionals? (No t33n-N30, the answer isn't »Pr3f3r3nc3Zz!!!!!!!! 1337-H4XX0R5!!!«.) Leaving the question unanswered for now, let's just face the fact that we are all beginners the first few hours in our computing career. The rest of the time, we're victims. Wait... an image is forming in my mind... It's a sweaty, hard-working bare-chested carpenter with a tiny red plastic hammer in his hand. Yes. This is his tool. Yes. He's been using it since he was 5.3. Visual Attention - Sine Qua NonEvery single little tiny-weeny little interaction-shraction requires your visual attention. And I'm not talking peripheral attention, nooooo, then we could all go home and interact, couldn't we? You have to actually drop focus on what you're looking at and move your eyesight in order to find that tiny little resize button of the window. If your screen is large enough, you are even forced to move your head to find that window resizing widget. There's more penalty: once you're done, you must relocate that thing or text you were reading before you got the divine idea of resizing the window. The same goes for moving, scrolling, closing, zooming, panning and... . The Alfred Einsteins over at Adobe's somehow found out their users like to pan their documents (inside information? mole in the building?), so they assigned the SPACEBAR to invoke the »divine semi-mode of panning«. All respect to Adobe for that - they did better than the combined efforts of Redmond, Cupertino, Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder (which equals the combined efforts of Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder). However according to my book, an action as atomic as panning mustn't be mode driven. In this particular case, Adobes panning only works if the user isn't inside a text object typing, in which case that »divine semi-mode of panning« is reduced to nothing but a space. An unwanted space at that.»But sir, all the other keys were busy!!«.No they weren't.Situations like these make me feel sorry for the spacebar. So big and strong... He totally rules over the other keys, and yet all he produces is... nothingness. I hope I never find myself in the situation of having to explain to aliens what the LAR[...]