4 ms·

> If an operation is infrequent and doesn't need to be made when driving, burying it in a touchscreen menu sounds great: conserve those physical control surface

> If an operation is infrequent and doesn't need to be made when driving, burying it in a touchscreen menu sounds great: conserve those physical control surfaces for stuff that matters so you don't have a ridiculous surplus of buttons.. That's a bit of a straw man. No one seriously says literally every function needs a button. And it makes sense to bury seldom-used things in menus. However, there's no reason those menus need to be touchscreen menus. E.g., in my car, care settings are in a menu, but the screen for it is in the instrument panel and controlled by buttons on the steering wheel. I believe the reason is when it was made they still offered a low-end trim level without a touchscreen entertainment system. This menu is better than a touchscreen, but IMHO it would have been better with done with menu-buttons in the center console screen.

mlyle 4y ago
> That's a bit of a straw man. It's not a straw man; it's nuanced agreement. It's a shame that people expect argument so much that they can't see where the edges of one opinion are being offered. > However, there's no reason those menus need to be touchscreen menus. Might as well be touchscreen menus. Using up and down buttons to pick things in a modal interface isn't clearly superior to a touchscreen for experienced users and worse for new people. A good button menu system is better than a bad touchscreen, especially with experience. But in a rental car, I appreciate the touchscreens to pair my phone, etc.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > It's not a straw man; it's nuanced agreement. It's a shame that people expect argument so much that they can't see where the edges of one opinion are being offered. I understand that, that's why I said it was "a bit" of one. > Might as well be touchscreen menus. Using up and down buttons to pick things in a modal interface isn't clearly superior to a touchscreen for experienced users and worse for new people. IMHO, if you have the space, f-key/button menus (e.g. the hardware shown at https://www.informatique-mania.com/en/tutoriels/quest-ce-que-le-systeme-acars-et-comment-fonctionne-t-il-en-communication-aeronautique/ https://www.informatique-mania.com/en/tutoriels/quest-ce-que...) are better than touchscreen menus.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    > IMHO, if you have the space, f-key/button menus (e.g. the hardware shown at https://www.informatique-mania.com/en/tutoriels/quest-ce-que https://www.informatique-mania.com/en/tutoriels/quest-ce-que...) are better than touchscreen menus. I like avionics and ATMs where you see these. They're great for experienced users with relatively fixed functionality. You can't tradeoff UI factors so easily, though. If you usually have 5 options, and found you have 6 somewhere-- you need to break up the section or add a page, etc. And if you add an option the user UI workflow completely changes. While, with a touchscreen you could accept a smaller target for the least-used option, and adding a new target on a page doesn't change things too much for users (and is arguably more discoverable).

mlyle 4y ago

> That's a bit of a straw man. It's not a straw man; it's nuanced agreement. It's a shame that people expect argument so much that they can't see where the edges of one opinion are being offered. > However, there's no reason those menus need to be touchscreen menus. Might as well be touchscreen menus. Using up and down buttons to pick things in a modal interface isn't clearly superior to a touchscreen for experienced users and worse for new people. A good button menu system is better than a bad touchscreen, especially with experience. But in a rental car, I appreciate the touchscreens to pair my phone, etc.

tablespoon 4y ago
> It's not a straw man; it's nuanced agreement. It's a shame that people expect argument so much that they can't see where the edges of one opinion are being offered. I understand that, that's why I said it was "a bit" of one. > Might as well be touchscreen menus. Using up and down buttons to pick things in a modal interface isn't clearly superior to a touchscreen for experienced users and worse for new people. IMHO, if you have the space, f-key/button menus (e.g. the hardware shown at https://www.informatique-mania.com/en/tutoriels/quest-ce-que-le-systeme-acars-et-comment-fonctionne-t-il-en-communication-aeronautique/ https://www.informatique-mania.com/en/tutoriels/quest-ce-que...) are better than touchscreen menus.
- mlyle 4y ago
  > IMHO, if you have the space, f-key/button menus (e.g. the hardware shown at https://www.informatique-mania.com/en/tutoriels/quest-ce-que https://www.informatique-mania.com/en/tutoriels/quest-ce-que...) are better than touchscreen menus. I like avionics and ATMs where you see these. They're great for experienced users with relatively fixed functionality. You can't tradeoff UI factors so easily, though. If you usually have 5 options, and found you have 6 somewhere-- you need to break up the section or add a page, etc. And if you add an option the user UI workflow completely changes. While, with a touchscreen you could accept a smaller target for the least-used option, and adding a new target on a page doesn't change things too much for users (and is arguably more discoverable).