3 ms·
On a touch sreen, chances are the finger obscures the state change, or much of it. When you are not super focused ("I don't trust this thing!"), it's easy to mi
by usrusr 3y ago
On a touch sreen, chances are the finger obscures the state change, or much of it. When you are not super focused ("I don't trust this thing!"), it's easy to miss the difference between before and after states. The animation serves as a low-threshold confirmation that the pixels are not just decoration and that the touch event has actually been registered.
Requiring the user to mentally diff before and after states would be like a sailor only confirming captain's orders when explicitly asked "did you understand me?" instead of an unsolicited aye.
Where the "on-state not as clear as with a checkbox" critique gets a resounding comeback is when slider-looking on/off states are introduced only because of fashion, but in a process where the language used in animations (e.g. screen mockup bitmaps) is completely unaware of animations and therefore they only happen if toolkit sliders match exactly. Yeah, don't ask...
- solardev 3y agoOr you could just use a checkbox
- iainmerrick 3y agoPreferably both. Make it a checkbox for clarity, and animate it for input feedback.
- usrusr 3y agoTends do get completely obscured and you're back to mental diffing. I know, I know, nothing a bigger checkbox could not solve, but they look weird when you only make them bigger horizontally.
- layer8 3y agoCheckboxes can usually be toggled by clicking/tapping on the label. That may not resolve all criticism, but I'm just saying.
- usrusr 3y agoTrue. Ideally you put some "event received" indication across the whole trigger area, e.g. that little Android ripple animation. Certainly does not hurt to do the same (whole area clickable, and with visual feedback) even when your designer insisted on fashionable slider-toggles. Subtle things like that greatly reduce the mental background load for the user, but that's impossible to quantify. Chances are you don't consciously notice when it's missing even when in theory you are fully aware of the concept.
- ChrisMarshallNY 3y ago> On a touch sreen, chances are the finger obscures the state change, or much of it. Here's how I deal with that, in my app: https://imgur.com/a/6uQnuox https://imgur.com/a/6uQnuox It's accompanied by haptics.
- card_zero 3y agoWhy can't phones have mouse pointers? Drag anywhere on the screen (ideally not where the pointer is) to grab the pointer. Do some kind of multitouch thing like tapping with a second finger to click. Then you can see what's under the mouse instead of constantly prodding your fat finger into the object of interest. I guess that would be too slow, or something? Not simple enough?
- ripe 3y agoHmm, I must admit I had never thought of this idea by card_zero: why not drive a mouse pointer using touch at a distance? Does anyone with experience in this know why it wouldn't work, or whether it has been tried?
- andrewaylett 3y agoMicrosoft's Android RDP client does this, the biggest issue is that it's not expected behaviour.
- usrusr 3y agoIt could only ever be good for some interactions, e.g. it would be terrible for when the screen is just three large buttons for super quick access. Mode switching would surely be awkward. I think I remember some map apps experimenting in that direction, but I consider the locusmaps "magnifying glass" undisputed king of that hill (touch interaction for maps).