3 ms·
Exactly. These fictional UIs are designed for a single end - to look good on camera. I think there is an inverse correlation between "cool" and "useful" - the "
by martin_ky 9y ago
Exactly. These fictional UIs are designed for a single end - to look good on camera. I think there is an inverse correlation between "cool" and "useful" - the "cool" often distracts from the "useful". While this kind of UI could work for something trivial like a simple calculator or alarm clock, in my experience it does not work for serious applications. As works of art however, these things are a beauty to look at - http://sciencefictioninterfaces.tumblr.com/ http://sciencefictioninterfaces.tumblr.com/
I had this idea first back when I saw Star Trek The Next Generation and its slick flat computer panels, called "okudagrams" after their designer, Michael Okuda - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCARS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LCARS. I tried to reproduce the look in a note-taking application. It didn't work. The UI was dominated by these large colored buttons and arches, with too much contrast against the black background, leaving too little room for the actual content.
- djsumdog 9y agoIf you watch Cinemasins, he often makes fun of how useless 3D holographic displays really are for displaying and understanding data.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- mmjaa 9y agoA corollary to this, though, is that UI's that cater to a well-written script and deliver the user into a story, which they enjoy manifesting over and over again, is a successful one. There is a lot of room for creative metaphor in computer UI, in my opinion - however, I do also agree with your contention that its up to the user. I'm quite sure these complicated interfaces are good for, at the very least, one single user.