4 ms·

Those UI screens look gorgeous, but are they really practical? By that I mean the software-based buttons. Would they be used in something this critical, surely

by orf 11y ago

Those UI screens look gorgeous, but are they really practical? By that I mean the software-based buttons. Would they be used in something this critical, surely a physical switch/button (maybe as a backup?) would be far better in this kind of situation? That being said most of those displays look like information displays rather than control panels.

GuiA 11y ago
UIs in movies are not designed to be useful or usable; rather, they are designed to add to the storytelling and atmosphere. (It is for this reason that it is typically quite ill advised to port UI concepts from movies into real world applications).
dogma1138 11y ago
Most movie UI's have several important restrictions that direct their look and feel as they need to be visible and mostly decipherable by the audience which usually means very large UI elements and over-explanatory graphics and text. Real current NASA UI probably looks like Java EE / Oracle forms from the late 90's currently with allot of small texts and things that aren't really comprehensible to unfamiliar users. So it would look more like this http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/projects/danteII/images/Images/dante-UI2D.gif http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/projects/danteII/images/Images/dan... Than well this: https://ilikeinterfaces.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/01_02_4600099.png https://ilikeinterfaces.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/01_02_46... Film viewers won't really dig a UI which is a bunch of bars and cipher texts that looks like this alt trj 32523 alt act 34233 tmp cls 4324 tmp int 23 aoa crt 31 It's boring and meaningless and if it's boring and meaningless there's no point of putting it in the film really or investing time in it, on a side note allot of movies that do use boring or meaningless UI's use them to hide easter eggs.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
elihu 11y ago
Switches fail, too. It does make sense to move as much as they can to software, since it saves weight and cost and you can have one generic human-input device as opposed to a whole wall of switches, buttons, knobs, and indicators.
- copperx 11y ago
  MTBF of a Cherry switch is around 1,000,000 clicks.

by orf 11y ago

GuiA 11y ago

UIs in movies are not designed to be useful or usable; rather, they are designed to add to the storytelling and atmosphere. (It is for this reason that it is typically quite ill advised to port UI concepts from movies into real world applications).

dogma1138 11y ago

Most movie UI's have several important restrictions that direct their look and feel as they need to be visible and mostly decipherable by the audience which usually means very large UI elements and over-explanatory graphics and text. Real current NASA UI probably looks like Java EE / Oracle forms from the late 90's currently with allot of small texts and things that aren't really comprehensible to unfamiliar users. So it would look more like this http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/projects/danteII/images/Images/dante-UI2D.gif http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/projects/danteII/images/Images/dan... Than well this: https://ilikeinterfaces.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/01_02_4600099.png https://ilikeinterfaces.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/01_02_46... Film viewers won't really dig a UI which is a bunch of bars and cipher texts that looks like this alt trj 32523 alt act 34233 tmp cls 4324 tmp int 23 aoa crt 31 It's boring and meaningless and if it's boring and meaningless there's no point of putting it in the film really or investing time in it, on a side note allot of movies that do use boring or meaningless UI's use them to hide easter eggs.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

elihu 11y ago

Switches fail, too. It does make sense to move as much as they can to software, since it saves weight and cost and you can have one generic human-input device as opposed to a whole wall of switches, buttons, knobs, and indicators.

copperx 11y ago
MTBF of a Cherry switch is around 1,000,000 clicks.