[HN Gopher] Never-Ending Learning of User Interfaces ___________________________________________________________________ Never-Ending Learning of User Interfaces Author : PaulHoule Score : 33 points Date : 2023-08-26 18:12 UTC (4 hours ago) (HTM) web link (arxiv.org) (TXT) w3m dump (arxiv.org) | bobthepanda wrote: | > For example, it is possible to guess if a UI element is | "tappable" from a screenshot (i.e., based on visual signifiers) | or from potentially unreliable metadata (e.g., a view hierarchy), | but one way to know for certain is to programmatically tap the UI | element and observe the effects. | | Sigh. | | If your site is accessible, this is pretty easy to semantically | derive. The issue is that frontend barriers to entry are so low, | and good teaching nonexistent, that we have an Eternal September | of new web devs making divs instead of buttons and links. | | --- | | The draggability work is certainly more interesting. I suppose | it's because it went out of fashion before the revival of new | standards in CSS and JS but it's kind of crazy there still isn't | a great, standardized way to do drag-and-drop on the web. | robotresearcher wrote: | This paper is about App Store apps, not web sites. | bobthepanda wrote: | Swift and Android also both have accessibility built in. | | https://developer.apple.com/documentation/swiftui/view- | acces... | | https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/ui/accessibility/. | .. | elcritch wrote: | Random web apps that aren't the worse offenders. Heck, half of | web apps use bootstrap and at least make buttons buttons. | | It's the big "professional" players like Apple, Microsoft, | Google, etc which appear to think that turning random text into | indiscriminate buttons is a _good idea_. It 's the worst of fad | driven trends. | | For example everytime I open up Apple TV app I have to button | left and right to figure out which show is highlighted because | the highlight is so subtle and I'm not 20 anymore. All the | other TV apps are just as bad, much less the phone apps. | [deleted] | pen2l wrote: | Pardon me that I'm somewhat off-topic but it seems tangentially | related, the rant I'm about to go on -- | | When looking particularly at the evolution of MS Office, I often | land on the view that UI peaked around 2010 and promptly shot | down in ruins with the advent of flat design. It's flat design | which went away from gradient textures on buttons which for | preceding years familiarized us with the impression of button | states, importance information, and a handful of other subtle | things. | | The stated reason was simple and understandable, the designs had | needed to remain sensibly consistent when switching from small | form factors to large ones, when resizing (or rotating e.g. when | a tablet goes from horiz. to vertical, etc. But I'm not satisfied | with this defense: it seems lazy, the gradient textures could | have been retained. It would have required a lot more work by | Microsoft/Google UI designers, but they chose not to step up to | the plate by just giving it all up to go the easy road. At least | Apple has had the courage to not take the easy way out. | [deleted] | bee_rider wrote: | The ribbon design apparently came out in 2007, which fits my | memory--it was terrible, Office was already well into decline | by 2010. | | Although, really, it is just what some of the other comments | mention here. Re-learning UI is just a pain in the butt. So, I | guess the first version of office that we all hate is the first | one that came out after we were kids and learning new UI was | fun. | pessimizer wrote: | > I guess the first version of office that we all hate is the | first one that came out after we were kids and learning new | UI was fun. | | It's not (just) that. It's that the "ribbon" didn't simplify | things, it just lowered the number of clicks to get to _some_ | things. But one of the reasons you organize things in | submenus is _to organize things._ | | It's easier and faster to find a particular thing hiding | within a few dozen labelled boxes, each filled with another | few dozen labeled boxes, than to find something when all of | the contents of all of those boxes are dumped out onto the | floor. Even more, within a hierarchy it's easier to find | other, closely related things to the thing that you were | looking for, if the thing you were looking for turns out not | to do the job. | MilStdJunkie wrote: | And thus was it shown why lightweight markup has taken over the | document space. | | Teams and then enterprises got real, real, _reaaaaaaal_ tired of | watching their overhead costs clock up new zeroes every time a | new Project Manager landed a gig in the MSO /Adobe/PTC/Wherever | design office. | | The exception are those enterprises locked into a tool ecosystem | by their customer contracts, aka, "you must use tool X to do the | thing we're paying you for". I don't have any doubt that such | contracts will die in a fire as the quest to cut costs continues; | they're a bad deal for literally everyone. | nullifidian wrote: | >Never-Ending Learning of User Interfaces | | At first I thought it's about users continually being forced to | relearn UX they relied for years because app's developers came up | with a new "design" that should "improve things" according to | their "studies" which found something confusing. | luckman212 wrote: | That's what it _should_ be about. I thought the same thing. I | 'm so tired of looking for where the "submit" button is or | trying to figure out your stupid new password requirements. | Must contain: 1 letter, 1 emoji, 2 uppercase, no "Z"s | allowed... smfh | eddd-ddde wrote: | You forgot to include today's wordle answer in your password. | analog31 wrote: | This is why the number-one request from users is: "Please don't | change anything." | | When you go through an office area, where people are using | "enterprise" software all day, make a mental note of the little | pieces of paper taped to their monitors and cube walls, with | written-out instructions for getting through everyday tasks. | One thing is that they don't want to be forced to re-make those | instructions, which may have been discovered at great cost. | bbarnett wrote: | Yep. | | Some industries, at this point in time, should be using the | same compute and toolkit in 100+ years. | | My mechanic is using software he bought in the 90s, in an | emulator, becuae _why change_? What 's the point? | | He enters customer names, he books appointments, he inputs | inventory, he bills. Nothing has changed in 30 years, norhing | will change in another 30. | | It's barely a gui by today's standard, and works wonderfully. | | Why transition to another POS system? Why worry about | conversion of current data? | | And the stuff he has is rock solid. All the new stuff he | tried has bugs, and the bug fixed versions have different | bugs. | | You wanna be a hard core dev? Develop stuff that will be | written to floppies and pressed to CDs, with no internet for | updates. | [deleted] ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-08-26 23:00 UTC)