3 ms·

We have been interacting with objects longer than we have been interacting with words for sure, but the words are more expressive. Think about a simple contact

We have been interacting with objects longer than we have been interacting with words for sure, but the words are more expressive. Think about a simple contact information "card" if you will. It's much easier for your brain to parse that tapping on the "call" button will call the phone number, or that that the message button will compose a new message. When there are that many different verbs as options, translating them into object manipulation is just too much. Think about what it would be like if you had to swipe to call but tap to email and twist to send a text message. Interacting with a verb is easier in the long run.

grinich 13y ago
This is the common argument for using verbs/buttons. And it certainly also makes sense in the physical world, where we pull levers or turn wheels to control larger machines (cars, airplanes, a stove, etc.) In my comment above, I actually mean "action" as "interaction" or more complex than a simple order like send/delete/etc. The trick to all of this is finding gestures (or whatever you want to call them) that allow some sort of direct manipulation in areas where the human mind has no experience. The best example right now is pinch-to-zoom, which has absolutely no physical equivalent, but is extremely intuitive. Compare this to having arrow and +/- magnifying glass buttons. As software blends more with the rest of the world, the machine-intentioned interaction is breaking down. It's kind of like trying to draw a photorealistic image using an etch-a-sketch, when instead you just need a pen and paper. (You could argue that pinch-to-zoom isn't very discoverable/learnable, but the reality is that people figure it out incredibly quickly, which is kind of amazing when you think about it. There's certainly something magically compelling about using one's hands in that way. Perhaps it's actually more important for interfaces to be instantly learnable than "intuitive.")

grinich 13y ago

This is the common argument for using verbs/buttons. And it certainly also makes sense in the physical world, where we pull levers or turn wheels to control larger machines (cars, airplanes, a stove, etc.) In my comment above, I actually mean "action" as "interaction" or more complex than a simple order like send/delete/etc. The trick to all of this is finding gestures (or whatever you want to call them) that allow some sort of direct manipulation in areas where the human mind has no experience. The best example right now is pinch-to-zoom, which has absolutely no physical equivalent, but is extremely intuitive. Compare this to having arrow and +/- magnifying glass buttons. As software blends more with the rest of the world, the machine-intentioned interaction is breaking down. It's kind of like trying to draw a photorealistic image using an etch-a-sketch, when instead you just need a pen and paper. (You could argue that pinch-to-zoom isn't very discoverable/learnable, but the reality is that people figure it out incredibly quickly, which is kind of amazing when you think about it. There's certainly something magically compelling about using one's hands in that way. Perhaps it's actually more important for interfaces to be instantly learnable than "intuitive.")