3 ms·
The aesthetic usability effect / paradox
- lo_zamoyski 3y agoAesthetics is not disjoint from utility. Indeed, there's a convertibility because the utility of a tool is related to its beauty as tools are essentially defined by their utility. A tool that has higher utility is more beautiful according to that measure, whereas one that is mediocre is far less so. There may be decorative aspects that may enhance the beauty of a tool in a way that perhaps does not contribute to utility (though I am not certain this is entirely the case as the function may simply be subtle), or the decorative aspects may be considered beautiful apart from the tool's utility, but the beauty of the tool is not simply decorative. A beautifully machined screw driver of the highest craftsmanship is ugly if it fails to function as a screwdriver.
- bitwize 3y agoGod damn it, Hotdog Stand made Windows more usable and I'll take that with me to the grave. Seriously, though, I'm starting to be convinced that a modern UI is a must for usability, and that people on Hackernews who favor e.g., a Windows 9x UI (which I was once one of) don't understand how usability actually works. To be user-friendly, a program must bathe its user in comfort, and dated looks and UI paradigms do not do that.
- _kulang 3y agoWindows 9x UIs probably do bathe that particular group of HN users in comfort. It’s less not understanding usability and more being disconnected from the typical user
- bitwize 3y agoHackernews types did just fine with 1970s terminal applications. Only with the introduction of the Macintosh did commercial computers become "usable". Usability to normies is usability. Even technical types benefit from it: normie-friendly systems impose less stress and cognitive load.
- smitty1e 3y agoOne falls short of seeing the paradoxical in this. Aesthetics matter.