UI Design/UI Components [closed]_问答_开发者_运维开发者技术经验分享

Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.

This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.

Closed 1 year ago.

开发者_开发知识库 Locked. This question and its answers are locked because the question is off-topic but has historical significance. It is not currently accepting new answers or interactions.

I've been thinking about the on going "revolution" in UI design and metaphors for interacting with the computer via a GUI and I'm suprised that as long as computers have been accessible through GUI's that programmers are still searching for the best way to allow the user to interact with their programs. It seems that most of the work centers around astetics(which I understand are important) but I don't understand why we are still looking for the magic bullet in UI design.

My question is: Why is UI design and components not a solved problem with accepted and understood approaches?

Probably because like most things, design (and tech, in general) are constantly changing, being worked on and revised. To say that one of the most crucial elements in software can be 'solved' would be an understatement and would be constantly changed again. There is no true definition to the 'perfect' GUI, only because you don't know who your users will be (power users versus casual, more input required vs less).

perfection is a moving target

Jacob Nielsen rightfully said about ten years ago that users don't scroll. This isn't true anymore.

Users get trained to user interfaces. Windows 7 doesn't show a system menu icon in the top left corner for many apps (e.g. in explorer), but you can still go there and invoke the system menu. Took me a while to notice the icon was missing for some apps - while using it.

(There are probably much better examples.)

The optimum isn't obvious. Consistency is core in UI, but only deviation from consistency can lead to improvements. You just can't optimize for "most consistent" or "most creative", both will fail.

it's a cross-domain skill. How many people are programmers, designers and neuroscientists? How many CS university courses teach cognitive models and how they apply to user interfaces? How many programmers pondered muscle memory, feedback loops and cognitive load?

UI's are still designed largely by programmers and sometimes fixed by designers after the fact.

effect is hard to measure
Take the Microsoft Office Ribbon: Judging from the responses, it seems to work better for many, yet is harder by orders of magnitude for others. It was a bold step, no doubt, but was it good? Microsoft does run UI tests, and they did it for the ribbons - whether they screwed up the tests, whether office politics won over facts, or wether the backslash was just wasn't forseeable in the data, I don't know. (But I'd seriously like to)

How many shops can afford user tests? Everyone can do hallway usability, but that just ensures you don't suck.

Skimming along the line
There is low pressure for the perfect UI, there is high pressure for a good enough UI. Given the lack of common knowledge and the high cost of improvement, perfect would not be affordable. The "Apple tradeoff" involves a higher price and technical shortcomings. They are pushing the limits (good!) with bold steps (very good!), which captures a notable but not major market segment. Still they are far from perfect.

I think if you ask Henry Ford the same question about designing automobiles you would have gotten an answer that would equally apply to your question today.

And that answer is, we're still in the infancy of human computer interaction design and we don't yet have enough data to design genuinely ideal systems. And, even if we did we don't yet have the ability to manufacture such an ideal system at an affordable price point.

Much like Henry Ford could not have designed the Bugatti Veryon in his day, nor could he have built it if he could design it. Or the Prius for that matter.

No, User interfaces isn't that subjective. Ergonomical matter is a scientific topic. Think about that : Today, everybody uses a computer. That was not the case 30 years ago. Today , everybody uses a glass surface to access data. That was not the case 30 years ago. Today, you've got several devices to access your data. That was not the case 30 years ago. Today, data is collected everywhere. That was not the case 30 years ago. Today, you can even control your data with glasses. That was not the case 30 years ago.

There is no magic bullet. just like nature, we're talking about an evolutive and living ecosystem, in the pure darwinian way.

UI design is to make people who have less knowledge about it but can easily understand the application and use it comfortable. That is core challenge of the UI design. So it evolves just like a robot. There is no end to perfect design. As along it makes the users to use easily then it is a perfect design.

User Interface is a very subjective subject, what might be ideal (graphically pleasing, efficient) for one person or task might not be ideal for another task or even another person doing the same task.

Also, the different platforms on which GUIs are implemented is ever changing and thus needing GUIs to evolve to meet specific platform demands (touch screens, ie. lend themselves towards a completely different user interface, then a mouse based platform, or even something like an ATM)

However, there are classes and books written on the subject, so there is some level of continuity in the area that has been there for quite some time.

Also, the different platforms on which GUIs are implemented is ever changing and thus needing GUIs to evolve to meet specific platform demands (touch screens, ie. lend themselves towards a completely different user interface, than a mouse based platform, or even something like an ATM)

However, there are classes and books written on the subject, so there is some level of continuity in the area that has been there for quite some time.

In short, TECHNOLOGY.