5 ms·
Yep: a better reason (than those given on SO) is that it's designed for minimal UX annoyance - it is least likely to cover up what you need to see while still s
by ronaldx 13y ago
Yep: a better reason (than those given on SO) is that it's designed for minimal UX annoyance - it is least likely to cover up what you need to see while still serving its purpose; the asymmetry allows you to more quickly understand which point is important.
It's instructive to observe the circumstances when the cursor changes: there is some indication of context change, but also the design of the cursor in each context is important.
- tlunter 13y agoA better reason in hindsight isn't the right answer. Likely they had to do it per limitations of the computers of the time. Trying to tie it to UX like a modern day designer is just wrong.
- ronaldx 13y agoAbsolutely disagree. As discussed in the accepted answer, vertical line cursors predate the slanted shape. Changing to a different style only makes sense as a design decision.
- rch 13y agoIt's probably not a good idea to underestimate the depth of the deliberations that actually took place at the time, based on a necessarily pragmatic justification for the accepted decision.