Reputation
2,179
Top tag
Next privilege 2,500 Rep.
Create tag synonyms
Badges
1 6 8
Newest
 Commentator
Impact
~62k people reached

  • 0 posts edited
  • 0 helpful flags
  • 9 votes cast
Oct
30
comment Should date pickers for meetings offer the ability to schedule a meeting for 0 minutes?
@JoeW Every option in a UI has a cost. The user must find the option they want among all the others, and they may misclick. "Is anyone likely to use this?" is a useful question in design. That's all I'm saying.
Oct
27
comment Should date pickers for meetings offer the ability to schedule a meeting for 0 minutes?
@JoeW The original question is "does this make sense as a feature?" Whether it requires work to implement is only one factor. Suppose we have a weekday input. It's more work to provide a dropdown than a free-form input, and a dropdown prevents people from typing a fictional weekday, which hey, maybe people want to do that for some reason I can't imagine. Absent a real use case, I'm going to do a bit more work and give the user a bit less freedom, because I think it will prevent mistakes and I see no downside. 0-minute meetings may be fine. But "no real use case" can be a good criteria, too.
Oct
16
comment Should date pickers for meetings offer the ability to schedule a meeting for 0 minutes?
@MrWonderful My point was that features aren't free - their very existence has a cost. If you allow something that makes no sense to you, there may be people who have a reason to do it, and for them, it's a feature. But there may also be people who do it by accident - eg, accidentally schedule a 0-minute meeting, and later wonder why that was even an option. For those people, it's a bug.
Oct
16
comment Should date pickers for meetings offer the ability to schedule a meeting for 0 minutes?
Not sure that's always true. It would require little or no effort to allow meetings of negative length, too, but it would clutter the UI, confuse people, and provide one more way that people could make a mistake. "I can't think of a realistic use for that" is exactly why I wouldn't allow it.
Feb
4
comment Why are keyboards still the predominant input device?
My guess is: speed. Using all your fingers simultaneously is fast. A proficient typist might type 75 words per minute on a keyboard. Have people hit such speeds with a mouse, touchscreen, pen device, etc? If not, there's your answer.
Mar
5
comment The Hamburger Icon - menu or drag affordance?
Got here by Googling the term after seeing this Tweet: twitter.com/jmspool/status/441224973047574528 I think it sums it up well. "The hamburger icon is the 2014 technique for providing mystery meat navigation. (And, thus, appropriately named.)"
Mar
4
comment What to call “Cancel” when “Cancel” is already the default action?
@KitGrose - I'd say "Keep Subscription" rather than "Don't cancel"
Mar
7
comment Would intentionally slowing down UI help to increase sales on shopping sites?
@ytk - grocery store A sometimes succeeds in selling me gum because they are slow, so I have to wait in line, and the gum is right next to me. So that's good for them, right? Maybe. But I hate waiting, so sometimes I go to grocery store B, which is faster, and A loses my business. That's my anecdotal viewpoint, but research is the best way to know what to do.
Mar
7
comment Would intentionally slowing down UI help to increase sales on shopping sites?
"you do wish the customers to take time to look at the art, rather than browsing through text description, reviews, related products etc". I still don't think you want to enforce a speed limit. An art gallery lets you walk through however you want, but strives to make each piece compelling enough that you'll want to pause, through quality, lighting, etc. In fact, being able to quickly skip pieces I don't like makes me more likely to find something I do like. As for distractions, you can ensure that the art remains large and central on-screen as I read any related text.
Mar
6
comment Would intentionally slowing down UI help to increase sales on shopping sites?
@LordScree - you clicked something. That means you gave them more information: "this thing is interesting to me." If the page loaded instantly, wouldn't you now be looking at even better targeted offers than before? In any case, the bottom line is that research backs up the "faster is better" point of view.
Dec
28
comment Any actual reason for complicated UIs?
There is a difference between complex and confusing. A cockpit control panel is necessarily complex because flying a plane is complex. A good UI there wouldn't be simple, but would make the most important information the most visible, the most often-used controls the most accessible, and the most "dangerous" ones difficult to press by accident. (No "eject the pilot" button next to the intercom button, for example.)
Oct
10
comment Should date validation allow “091011”?
@Bevan - I'd say that inconsistency makes the learning much curve harder. "You do it this way... but then you have to do this to get it to work in browser X... but that messes up browser Y unless you do that..." By comparison, writing server-side code is straightforward because there is one interpreter. If you did it wrong, you will know as soon as you run your code; you don't have to look at it in 10 different browsers and still get vague user feedback saying it's wrong.
Oct
7
comment Should date validation allow “091011”?
"Be liberal in what you accept" can actually backfire. Incorrect HTML markup is ambiguous; if browsers had historically rejected and refused to display it, coders would have learned to do it right. Instead they took a best guess how how to display it, and each one guessed differently. Then we got lots of bad legacy markup for which browsers had to maintain backwards compatability.