3 ms·

Windows also had ancient conventions, so what? > and all Mac apps adhere to the convention, or are laughed out of existence. so not all Mac apps adhere > the

by eviks 2y ago

Windows also had ancient conventions, so what? > and all Mac apps adhere to the convention, or are laughed out of existence. so not all Mac apps adhere > there is no approval process indeed > Ignoring HIG without good justification Oh, but there is a very easy justification - most of these defaults are poorly (unergonomically) engineered based on design ignorance from the 80s

lycopodiopsida 2y ago
I have yet to see how the defaults of windows are more ergonomic. I am also not aware that humans have significantly changed as a species since the 80s, so all the the ergonomic considerations are the same. Besides, it completely misses the point - ergonomics are often about convenience and knowing what to expect. A zoo of frameworks and UI paradigms is a most terrible outcome with any kind of HIG. Microsoft is not able to keep a consistent UI paradigm for their own software - what a shining beacon of chaos they are.
- eviks 2y ago
  I have yet to see how I stated that Windows defaults are more ergonomic. And your limited awarenes ignores the fact that ergonomic considerations were not properly taken into account in the design in the 80s just like now there are still plenty of ergonomic issues
quesera 2y ago
The Mac app ecosystem considers HIG failures to be serious bugs, and they do not survive. So yes, for all meaningful definitions, "all Mac apps adhere". You do not appear to know what you're talking about here, and I don't know why you're bothering to argue. Show me an example of an even semi-popular Mac app which uses a different convention for Print, and we might have a conversation. Your excerpted quotes are misleading, but I'll respond to one point: > most of these defaults are poorly (unergonomically) engineered based on design ignorance from the 80s You just invented that problem. Show me a more ergonomic design for Print. A large part of design/usability success is consistency and predictability.
- eviks 2y ago
  [flagged]

by eviks 2y ago

lycopodiopsida 2y ago

I have yet to see how the defaults of windows are more ergonomic. I am also not aware that humans have significantly changed as a species since the 80s, so all the the ergonomic considerations are the same. Besides, it completely misses the point - ergonomics are often about convenience and knowing what to expect. A zoo of frameworks and UI paradigms is a most terrible outcome with any kind of HIG. Microsoft is not able to keep a consistent UI paradigm for their own software - what a shining beacon of chaos they are.

eviks 2y ago
I have yet to see how I stated that Windows defaults are more ergonomic. And your limited awarenes ignores the fact that ergonomic considerations were not properly taken into account in the design in the 80s just like now there are still plenty of ergonomic issues

quesera 2y ago

The Mac app ecosystem considers HIG failures to be serious bugs, and they do not survive. So yes, for all meaningful definitions, "all Mac apps adhere". You do not appear to know what you're talking about here, and I don't know why you're bothering to argue. Show me an example of an even semi-popular Mac app which uses a different convention for Print, and we might have a conversation. Your excerpted quotes are misleading, but I'll respond to one point: > most of these defaults are poorly (unergonomically) engineered based on design ignorance from the 80s You just invented that problem. Show me a more ergonomic design for Print. A large part of design/usability success is consistency and predictability.

eviks 2y ago
[flagged]