3 ms·

I'd like to understand more about the rationale that led you down the path of creating this. In my years in enterprise, user and market research has driven the

by rrrx3 12y ago

I'd like to understand more about the rationale that led you down the path of creating this. In my years in enterprise, user and market research has driven the push to create UIs that are more compelling, that make users feel more at home and comfortable (as they would be with mobile and consumer products), while maintaining a more narrow focus on tasks instead of providing a generic one-size fits all paradigm. This framework stands in contrast to that, making things dull and boring. What caused you to go down this path?

mhd 12y ago
I'd like to work in that progressive sector of the enterprise, mine is still full of Swing, extjs and even Tk.
- tracker1 12y ago
  extjs isn't so bad.. My only complaints would be all the themes look a bit dated (and squashed on a large display), and I don't like OO paradigms in JS so much and ext is really heavy OO.
  - rrrx3 12y ago
    personal opinion - extjs is non-performant trash.
  - mhd 12y ago
    I'm generally putting extjs in the swing/MFC/Qt corner, no the angular/dojo/react/etc one, and yes, compared to that in a client/server setup it's not that bad -- at least it suggest a more sane communication setup and is only godawful when it comes to deploying, not outright hostile. But quite often, some corporations would've fared better keeping their old mainframe terminal apps. With mobile apps, both setups don't really fare too well, although with the recent influx of Windows tablets and styluses, I fear that we could be regressing to shoddy Visual Basic-ish apps with homegrown comm/sync protocols again.
- rrrx3 12y ago
  as much as i'd like to say the opposite, it's not nearly as progressive as it should be. There are tons and tons of places who are actively regressing.
whizzkid 12y ago
I actually think the opposite. The way it is built is just perfect to get used to automation of hands. You have the feeling right away that you can use "tab" and "space" to change/fill/move things in those. Putting more fancy things and making it not "boring" is not an easy job and most of the time fails i think. "make users feel more at home" will lead users to be focusing less time on the actual task and more time on the tool, isn't it ? Apart from what this framework does (didn't have time to play much), I congratulate the UX guys on this project for choosing this kind of design and behaviour. They could have totally another idea maybe for going this path but i love it.
- rrrx3 12y ago
  The research shows that there should be a greater convergence because of the cognitive dissonance that occurs otherwise. It is an inarguable fact that people are using software in all aspects of their lives - to have a simplified, straightforward experience in one instance and not the other is a huge source of frustration. I'm not trying to insinuate that making things "not boring" and simplifying is in any way easy. There are plenty of consumer apps that get this totally wrong. As far as "making them feel more at home" - the more comfortable a user is with an application, the less likely they are to make mistakes. The less mistakes, the more efficiency. The more efficiency, the either: A) less time spent in the application (for ad-hoc, or get in and get out applications - a common staple) or B) more tasks accomplished (for bread-and-butter, run the business, 24/7/365 applications) I want to be clear - I think that what has been built is an excellent job wrt technical implementation. However, the driving design justification seems wholly contrary to the direction the industry is (trying) to move toward.
  - mhd 12y ago
    > to have a simplified, straightforward experience in one instance and not the other is a huge source of frustration I fail to see how "simplified" and "bland" relate to each other here in opposing ways. Leaflets to join a gym and tax forms don't really have to share the same design goals, and anything beyond a landing page on the "home" interwebs tends to gravitate towards a more unified, "boring" appearance, too (standard desktop GUIs for the longest time, facebook, almost anything by Google -- or, well, this site). It would seem that having less colorful, unique splashes would actually run contrary to that, culminating in the abominations we've seen done with Flash in the past (or game GUIs, "unique" and/or cross-platform mobile app). Or the dreaded skeuomorphims we're just growing out of. Could you give any examples of common webapps that would be the right way to approach e.g. a corporate CRM?
Cthulhu_ 12y ago
My first assignment at my current employer was a short-term, fixed-price project where we had to create a rather boring internal web application that just showed some tables and sent off some pre-made requests to certain endpoints. The UX wasn't high on the priority list, and TBH I wish I had something like this back then, since we had to build our own, then send it off to some cheap designer that came back with shudder light blue gradients. I'd totally go for straight and sleek (and boring) like this project next time.
- mhd 12y ago
  Never mind that if "boring" isn't the wanted option, the alternative is probably pretty much dominated by corporate identity anyways, where a blank slate is better than some involved design (e.g. gradients, desktop-like 3D look or material design).
forgotAgain 12y ago
From my experience I disagree. Simpler and well known are more welcome in the enterprise and business in general. As an example consider the protests raised about the Office 2007 ribbon. An internal application cannot afford that type of resistance. If you had said simpler and more efficient interfaces I would have agreed. Current ERP and CRM applications try to put too much in front of the user at one time. It's better to have micro-applications that match a particular function. This looks like a good idea for that.
- rrrx3 12y ago
  I think you misunderstood my post. Everything I've seen does push for simplicity. But simplicity doesn't manifest itself here... datagrids are not simple, no matter how clean the lines are. Nor are forms without inherent rules about use and context. Data saturation and semantic satiation are both immense problems in the enterprise.
forgottenpass 12y ago
How can something be both compelling and at home/comfortable? If you're using the definition of compelling that you appear to be, they're concepts on opposite sides of the same spectrum. This framework stands in contrast to that, making things dull and boring. Dull and boring sounds UI to me exactly like at home and comfortable. Compelling sounds like the day to day trend hopping that we see all the time. The frantic activity means it can pick up usability and interaction improvements at a faster clip, but that's a byproduct. But the entire reason for this conversation could have little to do with Flakes' decisions and be more reflective of the way design will overloads existing words with new vague meanings and create statements that are illegible to people not versed in the existing narrative.
- rrrx3 12y ago
  "Compelling" refers to aesthetics and feeling of reward when using the application - "This is an attractive application that makes me feel good when i use it", while "at home & comfortable" means supporting the perpetual novice, allowing easy correction of errors, and lessening complexity - "I can make changes confidently without fear of fucking up because I know what all of these controls do and how they work." The two ideas are most certainly not at odds with each other. To put it bluntly, this framework does neither. It's a plain "business skin" on some well-worn but generally unusable interaction patterns, as I mentioned in an earlier comment.

by rrrx3 12y ago

mhd 12y ago

I'd like to work in that progressive sector of the enterprise, mine is still full of Swing, extjs and even Tk.

tracker1 12y ago
extjs isn't so bad.. My only complaints would be all the themes look a bit dated (and squashed on a large display), and I don't like OO paradigms in JS so much and ext is really heavy OO.
- rrrx3 12y ago
  personal opinion - extjs is non-performant trash.
- mhd 12y ago
  I'm generally putting extjs in the swing/MFC/Qt corner, no the angular/dojo/react/etc one, and yes, compared to that in a client/server setup it's not that bad -- at least it suggest a more sane communication setup and is only godawful when it comes to deploying, not outright hostile. But quite often, some corporations would've fared better keeping their old mainframe terminal apps. With mobile apps, both setups don't really fare too well, although with the recent influx of Windows tablets and styluses, I fear that we could be regressing to shoddy Visual Basic-ish apps with homegrown comm/sync protocols again.
rrrx3 12y ago
as much as i'd like to say the opposite, it's not nearly as progressive as it should be. There are tons and tons of places who are actively regressing.

whizzkid 12y ago

I actually think the opposite. The way it is built is just perfect to get used to automation of hands. You have the feeling right away that you can use "tab" and "space" to change/fill/move things in those. Putting more fancy things and making it not "boring" is not an easy job and most of the time fails i think. "make users feel more at home" will lead users to be focusing less time on the actual task and more time on the tool, isn't it ? Apart from what this framework does (didn't have time to play much), I congratulate the UX guys on this project for choosing this kind of design and behaviour. They could have totally another idea maybe for going this path but i love it.

rrrx3 12y ago
The research shows that there should be a greater convergence because of the cognitive dissonance that occurs otherwise. It is an inarguable fact that people are using software in all aspects of their lives - to have a simplified, straightforward experience in one instance and not the other is a huge source of frustration. I'm not trying to insinuate that making things "not boring" and simplifying is in any way easy. There are plenty of consumer apps that get this totally wrong. As far as "making them feel more at home" - the more comfortable a user is with an application, the less likely they are to make mistakes. The less mistakes, the more efficiency. The more efficiency, the either: A) less time spent in the application (for ad-hoc, or get in and get out applications - a common staple) or B) more tasks accomplished (for bread-and-butter, run the business, 24/7/365 applications) I want to be clear - I think that what has been built is an excellent job wrt technical implementation. However, the driving design justification seems wholly contrary to the direction the industry is (trying) to move toward.
- mhd 12y ago
  > to have a simplified, straightforward experience in one instance and not the other is a huge source of frustration I fail to see how "simplified" and "bland" relate to each other here in opposing ways. Leaflets to join a gym and tax forms don't really have to share the same design goals, and anything beyond a landing page on the "home" interwebs tends to gravitate towards a more unified, "boring" appearance, too (standard desktop GUIs for the longest time, facebook, almost anything by Google -- or, well, this site). It would seem that having less colorful, unique splashes would actually run contrary to that, culminating in the abominations we've seen done with Flash in the past (or game GUIs, "unique" and/or cross-platform mobile app). Or the dreaded skeuomorphims we're just growing out of. Could you give any examples of common webapps that would be the right way to approach e.g. a corporate CRM?

Cthulhu_ 12y ago

My first assignment at my current employer was a short-term, fixed-price project where we had to create a rather boring internal web application that just showed some tables and sent off some pre-made requests to certain endpoints. The UX wasn't high on the priority list, and TBH I wish I had something like this back then, since we had to build our own, then send it off to some cheap designer that came back with shudder light blue gradients. I'd totally go for straight and sleek (and boring) like this project next time.

mhd 12y ago
Never mind that if "boring" isn't the wanted option, the alternative is probably pretty much dominated by corporate identity anyways, where a blank slate is better than some involved design (e.g. gradients, desktop-like 3D look or material design).

forgotAgain 12y ago

From my experience I disagree. Simpler and well known are more welcome in the enterprise and business in general. As an example consider the protests raised about the Office 2007 ribbon. An internal application cannot afford that type of resistance. If you had said simpler and more efficient interfaces I would have agreed. Current ERP and CRM applications try to put too much in front of the user at one time. It's better to have micro-applications that match a particular function. This looks like a good idea for that.

rrrx3 12y ago
I think you misunderstood my post. Everything I've seen does push for simplicity. But simplicity doesn't manifest itself here... datagrids are not simple, no matter how clean the lines are. Nor are forms without inherent rules about use and context. Data saturation and semantic satiation are both immense problems in the enterprise.

forgottenpass 12y ago

How can something be both compelling and at home/comfortable? If you're using the definition of compelling that you appear to be, they're concepts on opposite sides of the same spectrum. This framework stands in contrast to that, making things dull and boring. Dull and boring sounds UI to me exactly like at home and comfortable. Compelling sounds like the day to day trend hopping that we see all the time. The frantic activity means it can pick up usability and interaction improvements at a faster clip, but that's a byproduct. But the entire reason for this conversation could have little to do with Flakes' decisions and be more reflective of the way design will overloads existing words with new vague meanings and create statements that are illegible to people not versed in the existing narrative.

rrrx3 12y ago
"Compelling" refers to aesthetics and feeling of reward when using the application - "This is an attractive application that makes me feel good when i use it", while "at home & comfortable" means supporting the perpetual novice, allowing easy correction of errors, and lessening complexity - "I can make changes confidently without fear of fucking up because I know what all of these controls do and how they work." The two ideas are most certainly not at odds with each other. To put it bluntly, this framework does neither. It's a plain "business skin" on some well-worn but generally unusable interaction patterns, as I mentioned in an earlier comment.