4 ms·
This is not an example of that. The obvious solution is to just tell me what the temperature is. Then no arrow needed. Or just mark on the dial cooler, warmer
by 2muchcoffeeman 3y ago
This is not an example of that.
The obvious solution is to just tell me what the temperature is. Then no arrow needed.
Or just mark on the dial cooler, warmer and a little arrow at the top to tell you what the setting is.
Or even a curved triangle shape that’s blue on the skinny end and red on the thick end to indicate what is hot or cold.
This is none of that. They chose some arbitrary scale. And then gave you an arrow that could indicate what the numbers do or what turning the dial does. That’s pretty special.
- edu 3y agoOr, as like I assume in this case, the temperature control is not precise instead of numbers use some iconography. Like 0, *, **, ***, ... edit: utf-8 snowflakes don't rener... using asterisks *
- kwhitefoot 3y ago> The obvious solution is to just tell me what the temperature is. The manufacturer doesn't know what temperature the numbers represent just that they definitely cover the range of interest. The dial is repeatable but not accurate.
- pintxo 3y agoYou just gave three possible alternatives, how is that not a perfect example for a non-trivial design decision? Also, the simple fact that they quite clearly got it wrong, is the 2nd indicator that it a non-trivial thing.
- 2muchcoffeeman 3y agoI don’t think so because they skipped some obvious ways to show low and high on a dial. They went out of their way to add complexity for whatever reason.