4 ms·

I'm sure that people at Lyros, AltaVista and Excite were saying the same whilst building their heavy UIs before Google came along. The problem is on-boarding -

I'm sure that people at Lyros, AltaVista and Excite were saying the same whilst building their heavy UIs before Google came along. The problem is on-boarding - once the user learns to ask for computer a question then the text (or voice) interface has the potential to be on a completely different level than a graphical interface. Just imagine - instead of searching through a dozen menus for an option you just ask. Hell, that's how most people work with Microsoft Office now - fumble around trying to find out where they've hidden the option. Fail. Open Google and type "how to change signatures in Outlook 20XX". Slack solve that brilliantly - their on-boarding is well designed - the way it gradually introduces features and reinforces concepts is excellent. It reminds me of modern videogames in design.

_of 11y ago
> Lyros Lycos
- radicalbyte 11y ago
  Oops. Dunno who voted you down, considering I can no longer correct the typo this post adds value :)
ryanpetrich 11y ago
Oddly enough, the team that built Slack first worked on a MMORPG.
duncanawoods 11y ago
This is not a good example. Google did not beat Lycos etc. by on-boarding any non-geeks to text commands, instead they proved the effectiveness of page-ranking dumb searches. Non-geeks do not use additional search syntax compared to the number using the nice obvious and clickable "Images" or "videos" tab.
- felipeerias 11y ago
  The Google example points at one mayor constraint of text-based UIs: either you severely restrict the language that people can use to query the system, or you will be dealing with a really hard, Google-size problem.
  - rsync 11y ago
    "The Google example points at one mayor constraint of text-based UIs: either you severely restrict the language that people can use to query the system, or you will be dealing with a really hard, Google-size problem." I disagree, and I think we can see the counter-example very clearly with altavista. You could go to altavista and type in "dumb" search queries, just like google. But simultaneously, with no change at all in the UI and no constraints imposed on the "dumb" users, you could also type in very sophisticated boolean searches like: linux grep ("regular expression" and "regex") and get very precise and sophisticated search results. I miss this every single day
- radicalbyte 11y ago
  They beat Lycos etc by having a better product built around a very different paradigm : better performance from the text search, negating need for the heavy graphical hinting. That's what I was trying to get at :) For the time I'd also argue that their "on-boarding" was excellent: a textbox and two buttons, you can't get simpler :) The 2015 equivalent would be adding animated instructions in a pencil typeface on the search box and buttons. The demographics and expectations are different now.
derefr 11y ago
> Just imagine - instead of searching through a dozen menus for an option you just ask. A lesser example: half the time I want to use a menu-item in OSX now, I find it by going to the Help menu and typing something in the fuzzy-match box. I'm not sure why this hasn't been made the primary OSX menu interface.

_of 11y ago

> Lyros Lycos

radicalbyte 11y ago
Oops. Dunno who voted you down, considering I can no longer correct the typo this post adds value :)

ryanpetrich 11y ago

Oddly enough, the team that built Slack first worked on a MMORPG.

duncanawoods 11y ago

This is not a good example. Google did not beat Lycos etc. by on-boarding any non-geeks to text commands, instead they proved the effectiveness of page-ranking dumb searches. Non-geeks do not use additional search syntax compared to the number using the nice obvious and clickable "Images" or "videos" tab.

felipeerias 11y ago
The Google example points at one mayor constraint of text-based UIs: either you severely restrict the language that people can use to query the system, or you will be dealing with a really hard, Google-size problem.
- rsync 11y ago
  "The Google example points at one mayor constraint of text-based UIs: either you severely restrict the language that people can use to query the system, or you will be dealing with a really hard, Google-size problem." I disagree, and I think we can see the counter-example very clearly with altavista. You could go to altavista and type in "dumb" search queries, just like google. But simultaneously, with no change at all in the UI and no constraints imposed on the "dumb" users, you could also type in very sophisticated boolean searches like: linux grep ("regular expression" and "regex") and get very precise and sophisticated search results. I miss this every single day
radicalbyte 11y ago
They beat Lycos etc by having a better product built around a very different paradigm : better performance from the text search, negating need for the heavy graphical hinting. That's what I was trying to get at :) For the time I'd also argue that their "on-boarding" was excellent: a textbox and two buttons, you can't get simpler :) The 2015 equivalent would be adding animated instructions in a pencil typeface on the search box and buttons. The demographics and expectations are different now.

derefr 11y ago

> Just imagine - instead of searching through a dozen menus for an option you just ask. A lesser example: half the time I want to use a menu-item in OSX now, I find it by going to the Help menu and typing something in the fuzzy-match box. I'm not sure why this hasn't been made the primary OSX menu interface.