4 ms·

> Everyone needs to just stop knowing best. 99.9 times out of 100 they don't. And yet, your hatred is directed at the PoV that companies should respect an OS's

by Bahamut 10y ago

> Everyone needs to just stop knowing best. 99.9 times out of 100 they don't. And yet, your hatred is directed at the PoV that companies should respect an OS's conventions, yet who says that the OS knows best?

scarecrowbob 10y ago
Well, if "best" is "follows conventions", then maybe the folks that set the conventions "know best"?
- Bahamut 10y ago
  My point was the direct contradiction in statements there. Choosing the choices that a platform makes as the standard setter is arbitrary in a fashion, as why should those standards be the standard? There is no real reason why that makes it better.
  - ultramancool 10y ago
    Yes there is - it makes your app integrate better with the platform. Sure, the initial choices may have been completely arbitrary, but as an app developer you have to live by them now. Consistency is the reason. Users learn the platform and learn its standard UI paradigms. Should you choose not to follow them, your users will not be very pleased to say the least, often confused as to why your app doesn't operate like everything else on their device.
- PeterisP 10y ago
  No, the whole point is that if everyone on the platform does it in one way that is "8/10 good" and there is another way that really objectively is "9/10 good" superior, then still the proper choice would be to follow the convention, as for the end user inconsistency is a much bigger drawback than the (comparatively small) improvement that can be done by doing it differently.
CountSessine 10y ago
The operating system set a policy, and the user chose that policy when they chose that operating system.
usefulcat 10y ago
Customers, who vote with their pocketbook.
HillaryBriss 10y ago
True, the OS does not know best, especially in the case of Android. But the user benefits a great deal from consistency of behavior across all apps. The bar for deviating from OS convention should be high, not only to preserve the user's sanity, but also because most users will tire of an app's design innovations, however brilliant, if those innovations impose a learning curve. Most users are not that dedicated to a piece of software.
caseysoftware 10y ago
It's not about "knowing best" in that case, it's about familiarity and reducing cognitive load. When someone picks up a new piece of software, they have to figure out 1) does it solve their problem, 2) how do they use it, and 3) how do they solve their immediate problem with it? When you have familiar UI elements, actions, terms, and explanations, you can speed along Step 2 for minimal effort. If you introduce new interactions and ideas, you're adding a Step 2b that will not pay off in the short term. It might in the long term, but not right now. Every question, struggle, etc that you put in front of a user is one more reason to not use your software. Some users really NEED it and will overcome everything but that's not something to bet on.
anexprogrammer 10y ago
Often it doesn't, but to me, that's not the point. The point is the consistency between disparate apps from different vendors and backgrounds is what matters for usability. That ability to know your way around nearly every app on first use, just from knowing the OS trumps most else. There's lots of things I use occasionally - I don't want to RTFM every time. I dislike how Windows and Android do a lot of things, and how OSX does some. I'd still prefer devs respect that than "improve" on it. When I find a utility to add a dark theme or fix some niggle the OS does really badly - multi-screen perhaps, the standard stuff interoperates with it just fine. The clever "knowing best" program is the one that breaks it, or interoperates only partially. eg Photoshop has a lovely dark GUI now, but now doesn't get the multiscreen util's extra icons. Let the user decide. They can add a multi-screen util or theme, or even simple things like xmouse and they should work everywhere, or they can just use the vanilla OS as they prefer. EDIT: caseysoftware puts it rather more succinctly.

by Bahamut 10y ago

scarecrowbob 10y ago

Well, if "best" is "follows conventions", then maybe the folks that set the conventions "know best"?

Bahamut 10y ago
My point was the direct contradiction in statements there. Choosing the choices that a platform makes as the standard setter is arbitrary in a fashion, as why should those standards be the standard? There is no real reason why that makes it better.
- ultramancool 10y ago
  Yes there is - it makes your app integrate better with the platform. Sure, the initial choices may have been completely arbitrary, but as an app developer you have to live by them now. Consistency is the reason. Users learn the platform and learn its standard UI paradigms. Should you choose not to follow them, your users will not be very pleased to say the least, often confused as to why your app doesn't operate like everything else on their device.
PeterisP 10y ago
No, the whole point is that if everyone on the platform does it in one way that is "8/10 good" and there is another way that really objectively is "9/10 good" superior, then still the proper choice would be to follow the convention, as for the end user inconsistency is a much bigger drawback than the (comparatively small) improvement that can be done by doing it differently.

CountSessine 10y ago

The operating system set a policy, and the user chose that policy when they chose that operating system.

usefulcat 10y ago

Customers, who vote with their pocketbook.

HillaryBriss 10y ago

True, the OS does not know best, especially in the case of Android. But the user benefits a great deal from consistency of behavior across all apps. The bar for deviating from OS convention should be high, not only to preserve the user's sanity, but also because most users will tire of an app's design innovations, however brilliant, if those innovations impose a learning curve. Most users are not that dedicated to a piece of software.

caseysoftware 10y ago

It's not about "knowing best" in that case, it's about familiarity and reducing cognitive load. When someone picks up a new piece of software, they have to figure out 1) does it solve their problem, 2) how do they use it, and 3) how do they solve their immediate problem with it? When you have familiar UI elements, actions, terms, and explanations, you can speed along Step 2 for minimal effort. If you introduce new interactions and ideas, you're adding a Step 2b that will not pay off in the short term. It might in the long term, but not right now. Every question, struggle, etc that you put in front of a user is one more reason to not use your software. Some users really NEED it and will overcome everything but that's not something to bet on.

anexprogrammer 10y ago

Often it doesn't, but to me, that's not the point. The point is the consistency between disparate apps from different vendors and backgrounds is what matters for usability. That ability to know your way around nearly every app on first use, just from knowing the OS trumps most else. There's lots of things I use occasionally - I don't want to RTFM every time. I dislike how Windows and Android do a lot of things, and how OSX does some. I'd still prefer devs respect that than "improve" on it. When I find a utility to add a dark theme or fix some niggle the OS does really badly - multi-screen perhaps, the standard stuff interoperates with it just fine. The clever "knowing best" program is the one that breaks it, or interoperates only partially. eg Photoshop has a lovely dark GUI now, but now doesn't get the multiscreen util's extra icons. Let the user decide. They can add a multi-screen util or theme, or even simple things like xmouse and they should work everywhere, or they can just use the vanilla OS as they prefer. EDIT: caseysoftware puts it rather more succinctly.