14 ms·

To me, none of these seems like a real improvement, and they all have drawbacks. Part of the reason the current layout works is because it is well chunked. You

To me, none of these seems like a real improvement, and they all have drawbacks. Part of the reason the current layout works is because it is well chunked. You have 123 on top, 456 in the middle, and 789 on the bottom. 0 and functional keys, which often serve their own purpose, get their own row. Four sets of three, nicely like the way our minds like to remember numerals and sets of numerals. Shape-wise, 1-9 are in a square, in numerical order from left to right just like a paragraph, then the others continue the pattern to a lesser extent. This creates a very easy and forgiving mental map because it is a simple shape, the full width (more or less) of the display or device, with a familiar pattern. In contrast, 4 of these designs have different numbers of numbers on each row, some with several different widths. You'd have to remember, was it three numbers in the first row, or two? How many in the second? Was that one with an extra button on the side? So to start these designs don't seem to consider why the original design is successful. Next they don't seem to include the context of the thumb thing. We often hold our phone in one hand because precision is not required for most apps, for example Instagram where all functionality is within that bottom easy zone. But other apps require precision, many games for instance, and it's likely people change their grip frequently for those contexts. Is there data on that specifically? Anecdotally I seem to remember most people I know holding with one hand and dialing with the other. So the reach of the thumb isn't as big a consideration as the designers might think. And as others have pointed out it won't save much time, since hardly anyone uses the dialpad except the occasional adding of a contact or dialing of a conference line. I don't mean to rag on this (rereading, I sounded more critical than I am), I think it's fun to try to redesign stuff. But it reminds me of when people try to remake the ordinary wall outlet. They start modifying it without really considering how deceptively well designed it is.

astrodust 9y ago
Every single one of these alternative layouts is a load of hot garbage. The reason the current layout is good is because it's good enough and familiar. If you have a problem with thumb reach then make the pad smaller, move it closer to the thumb, or make it easier for people to input the number through other methods than keypad. We can recognize QR codes, heck, even do AR on a phone. Surely identifying phone numbers via the camera and inputting them that way would be easy and a measurable improvement over the current method of mashing buttons. Since dialing a number by hand is such an infrequent operation, inventing some wonkball new standard for it is a super bad plan. There's a lot of other things you could innovate on and come up with real improvements, like how you might make a better audio playback control system, or re-visiting mixing tools (equalizer, cross-fader, effects filters) for music to make them easier to understand on an intuitive level. The dial pad is fine. Leave it alone.
- rightos 9y ago
  > Surely identifying phone numbers via the camera and inputting them that way would be easy and a measurable improvement over the current method of mashing buttons. Not many people really dial phone numbers these days though - dialing via contacts, history, a link on a website or Google Maps are far more common in my experience. The issue is already pretty much solved without the need for any OCR - of course Google Goggles does do that too if you need it.
- auvrw 9y ago
  > The dial pad is fine. Leave it alone. i did https://github.com/ransomw/simp-phone/blob/master/client/app/comp/dialpad.js https://github.com/ransomw/simp-phone/blob/master/client/app... ... and it still turned out to be a convoluted story of code design. perhaps the results will be useful to anyone considering pursing the UI design end of things.
- ksk 9y ago
  Choosing to work on improving things that are used infrequently, or impact a smaller populace is good. The long-tail of UX is well understood.
  - astrodust 9y ago
    Not really. What if there's an emergency and someone's trying to dial a number but, due to mitigating circumstances, are having trouble using your crazypants dial pad? What if, worse, they're only familar with your pad and are confronted with an actual phone that uses a totally different system? What if this isn't a dial pad, but an interface for a car or heavy equipment? What if, in a moment of panic, someone's muscle memory kicks in and they do what they've always done to avoid disaster, only in your system it does the opposite? Switching from rotary dial to a dial pad was a big deal, and whatever system they chose for the dial pad out of all those kooky options would be the standard. If they had them in random order for whatever reason, then leave it alone. I see this all the time when people think they're "helping" by showing a keyboard in alphabetical order. No, not helping. It used to be that every single country would have one or more power plug types. Over the years some have faded out, sometimes reluctantly, sometimes stubbornly, but having fewer standards is almost always better. The long-tail of UX is misunderstood indeed. Just because you can redesign something doesn't mean you should.
pedalpete 9y ago
I'll agree with you on the precision issue, as these designs would seem to need greater precision to hit the correct button, even if only by a few degrees. However, the consistency of rows I think only makes sense with physical buttons where you can feel your way across them. With a flat panel, we don't really have the feedback anyway, so you can't touch your way down to the next row and know where you are. Having said all that, I'm not a fan of these designs, but I am a fan of the designer taking on the challenge.
sirgg0119 9y ago
sure. its like saying the qwerty keyboard is well chunked and can't be improved on... the point is to improve ergonomics and can be improved depending on how the user holds the phone.
ksk 9y ago
We get stuck with common ways of doing things, sometimes for good reasons, or sometimes for no-good reasons. An occasional re-think is useful, even if its just a mental exercise. As you mention there is a lot of inertia with this one, but they're not plotting to take your favorite dial-pad layout away from you anytime soon :)
sizzle 9y ago
Excellent analysis. Chunking is essential to the human brain.
Too 9y ago
I use the dialpad all the time. Not for numbers, but it also supports T9, searching through your contact list by names.

astrodust 9y ago

Every single one of these alternative layouts is a load of hot garbage. The reason the current layout is good is because it's good enough and familiar. If you have a problem with thumb reach then make the pad smaller, move it closer to the thumb, or make it easier for people to input the number through other methods than keypad. We can recognize QR codes, heck, even do AR on a phone. Surely identifying phone numbers via the camera and inputting them that way would be easy and a measurable improvement over the current method of mashing buttons. Since dialing a number by hand is such an infrequent operation, inventing some wonkball new standard for it is a super bad plan. There's a lot of other things you could innovate on and come up with real improvements, like how you might make a better audio playback control system, or re-visiting mixing tools (equalizer, cross-fader, effects filters) for music to make them easier to understand on an intuitive level. The dial pad is fine. Leave it alone.

rightos 9y ago
> Surely identifying phone numbers via the camera and inputting them that way would be easy and a measurable improvement over the current method of mashing buttons. Not many people really dial phone numbers these days though - dialing via contacts, history, a link on a website or Google Maps are far more common in my experience. The issue is already pretty much solved without the need for any OCR - of course Google Goggles does do that too if you need it.
auvrw 9y ago
> The dial pad is fine. Leave it alone. i did https://github.com/ransomw/simp-phone/blob/master/client/app/comp/dialpad.js https://github.com/ransomw/simp-phone/blob/master/client/app... ... and it still turned out to be a convoluted story of code design. perhaps the results will be useful to anyone considering pursing the UI design end of things.
ksk 9y ago
Choosing to work on improving things that are used infrequently, or impact a smaller populace is good. The long-tail of UX is well understood.
- astrodust 9y ago
  Not really. What if there's an emergency and someone's trying to dial a number but, due to mitigating circumstances, are having trouble using your crazypants dial pad? What if, worse, they're only familar with your pad and are confronted with an actual phone that uses a totally different system? What if this isn't a dial pad, but an interface for a car or heavy equipment? What if, in a moment of panic, someone's muscle memory kicks in and they do what they've always done to avoid disaster, only in your system it does the opposite? Switching from rotary dial to a dial pad was a big deal, and whatever system they chose for the dial pad out of all those kooky options would be the standard. If they had them in random order for whatever reason, then leave it alone. I see this all the time when people think they're "helping" by showing a keyboard in alphabetical order. No, not helping. It used to be that every single country would have one or more power plug types. Over the years some have faded out, sometimes reluctantly, sometimes stubbornly, but having fewer standards is almost always better. The long-tail of UX is misunderstood indeed. Just because you can redesign something doesn't mean you should.

pedalpete 9y ago

I'll agree with you on the precision issue, as these designs would seem to need greater precision to hit the correct button, even if only by a few degrees. However, the consistency of rows I think only makes sense with physical buttons where you can feel your way across them. With a flat panel, we don't really have the feedback anyway, so you can't touch your way down to the next row and know where you are. Having said all that, I'm not a fan of these designs, but I am a fan of the designer taking on the challenge.

sirgg0119 9y ago

sure. its like saying the qwerty keyboard is well chunked and can't be improved on... the point is to improve ergonomics and can be improved depending on how the user holds the phone.

ksk 9y ago

We get stuck with common ways of doing things, sometimes for good reasons, or sometimes for no-good reasons. An occasional re-think is useful, even if its just a mental exercise. As you mention there is a lot of inertia with this one, but they're not plotting to take your favorite dial-pad layout away from you anytime soon :)

sizzle 9y ago

Excellent analysis. Chunking is essential to the human brain.

Too 9y ago

I use the dialpad all the time. Not for numbers, but it also supports T9, searching through your contact list by names.