Please, UI designers : microblogmemes

[-] Madrigal@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Modern UI designers don’t have a fucking clue.

You’d think the first principle would be “don’t break the existing fucking UI”, but no.

Infinite scroll. Windows without toolbars. Replacing context menu with useless site-specific one. Forcing links to open in new or same tab, depriving the user of choice. Blocking text select. Blocking copy, as if that’s somehow going to stop people from stealing your shitty content. Fucking with the browser history.

And then there’s the constant reinventing of the wheel. How many times do we need to implement a fucking checkbox?

No lie, I’ve actually had designers come to me with a concept for “a visual indicator that shows the user how they are progressing through the page”.

[-] halfway_neko@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 months ago

forcing new tabs drives me crazy. like how dare you. i even tried to disable it in firefox, but when i do it makes all 'open in browser' things overwrite the current tab :(

[-] Madrigal@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I hate the opposite even more - sites that block you from opening new tabs when you need to, as if you somehow don't ever need to be able to access multiple pieces of information concurrently, or return directly to your current context.

"Oh, we're following the single-page app paradigm." No, you're a fucking website. Follow the fucking website paradigm.

You can just tell these idiots have never actually done any real work.

[-] flamingos@feddit.uk 0 points 2 months ago

No lie, I’ve actually had designers come to me with a concept for “a visual indicator that shows the user how they are progressing through the page”.

What the actual fuck, do these people actually use computers.

My biggest gripe is websites that take control of the browser C-f.

[-] Dave@lemmy.nz 1 points 2 months ago

I mean, over the years the scroll bar has got less and less visible. Maybe these people don't even realise it exists.

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I hate how tiny it often is now. What the fuck. Not to mention the ever decreasing contrast.

[-] einlander@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Text that doesn't wrap and goes off screen. Scrollbars that shrink to a single pixel. Universal undo (open multiple Excel Windows and do stuff in all of them. When you undo it will follow your activity instead of being local to the window). Excels crappy copy.

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

One of the many extremely basic issues with Excel. Absolutely disgusting.

[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Excel does all those things it does because it's always done those things it does, and if Microsoft changes it everyone will pitch a fit and probably sue because now they have to retrain their entire accounting department.

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

I disagree. There are louts of things that would not change old behavior but add so much convenience. Like cell reference for diagram ranges. But nope, we are stuck in 199...4?

[-] Madrigal@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

I love some of the newer things like LET and LAMBDA. But I'd kill for structured references to be properly implemented everywhere. I'm a bit over using INDIRECT to get around it (when I can).

[-] Eheran@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Yes. I have build dynamic diagrams with indirect, I feel ashamed.

Let us use Python instead of cancerous VBA. You can not even add comments to your variable definitions. Or named vars in functions. Why do I even need macros at all to simply define a function?

[-] Madrigal@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

You don’t, any more. At least not for relatively simple functions.

LAMBDA combined with the name manager lets you do custom functions even in a regular .xlsx workbook.

You don’t get the full control flow and extended functionality you do in VBA, and Python would be amazing of course, but I find LAMBDA covers about 90% of use cases.

[-] kamen@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Hard agree. I'm not dyslexic, but I also occasionally mark text to keep progress, especially if it's a long piece. And if I really want to copy that text, I will, sometimes just out of spite that you're trying to outsmart me, and I'm more likely to leave your site sooner too.

Also, while we're at it, can you please leave scrolling behaviour alone and not override it? I have a nice mouse that lets me scroll as fast or as slow as I want to. In some rare cases with a fancy UI where one wheel notch scrolls a whole page I agree that overriding the behaviour is warranted. In all other cases just FUCKING LEAVE SCROLLING AS IS (as handled by the OS and the browser) and don't try to be fancy; if you try to be fancy for no particular reason, I'm more likely to leave your site ASAP rather than prefer it over other sites.

[-] RageAgainstTheRich@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Isn't it amazing when text is also not selectable? Like its rendered behind some other shit?

I fucking hate websites ❤️

[-] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Like when someone makes an image of text? At least OP set alt text & linked to the source with real text: rare at lemmy.

[-] rtxn@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I have a deep hatred for modern designs. Especially Material and Adwaita. There's SO. FUCKING. MUCH. WASTED. SPACE. Early 2000s Winamp on my 1024x768 monitor had more concise and legible information than Tidal and Spotify do on 1440p fullscreen. It legitimately pisses me off.

[-] boolean_sledgehammer@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

UI designer/developer here. One who works on features that facilitate reading.

Based on their writing style and the text highlighting habit, this person is likely dyslexic. I've helped create functions that facilitate this behavior, which is better suited as a mode that can be enabled manually. There are browser extensions that can do this sort of thing for you. I've worked on a lot of assistive reading features.

If this was set as a default behavior, most users would fucking riot. Most of them are using text highlighting for what this person doesn't want to do.

Edit - I think I need to emphasize that this is based on real data. A shit ton of it. These decisions aren't made based on vibes. If the user base is performing a specific action repeatedly, we're going to facilitate it. We can see what you all are doing. UI's aren't built around a bunch of conflicting edge cases based on anecdotes. If something performs a certain way, at least major applications, it's usually because a lot of direct observations and metrics have strongly indicated that this is the preferred approach.

Admittedly, sometimes business goals get in the way of that. But if those business goals we have to push get in the way of conversions, they get abandoned pretty quickly.

[-] pyre@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

lots of people do it, not just people with dyslexia. it helps keep track of where you are when there are large blocks of text. also it usually raises contrast so I'm sure that helps some people even more.

[-] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com -1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

it helps keep track of where you are when there are large blocks of text

So does the edge of the window & mouse pointer.

also it usually raises contrast

If the contrast sucks, then the UI is already broken. There are accessibility standards for

If you're selecting merely to read, there's a good chance the text is too small, the lines too long without enough space, the contrast too low, and that would all be addressed by following common web accessibility standards. Good accessibility is good UI.

16px is commonly considered a good minimum text size for accessibility. When I outgrew thinking tiny text was cool, I standardized interfaces to render at least that size & found a vast improvement.

[-] xtr0n@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

When I am on a phone, let me zoom on whatever the fuck I want. Unconditionally. Period. I won’t purchase shit off of your shitty site if I can’t see it. And you obviously have no clue how shitty my vision has gotten over the years. And for the love of anything good in the world, don’t wait till I’m zoomed in to pop a fucking model asking me if I want to join your list for 10% off. If I buy something, you’re gonna put me on your list, whether I like it or not. And I can’t stop you if I actually want a receipt. So just give me the discount. Or don’t. I don’t even fucking care anymore. Just fuck off. Fuck.

[-] rothaine@lemm.ee 1 points 2 months ago

Firefox for Android. Settings -> Accessibility -> Enable zoom on all websites

Extensions -> uBlock Origin -> check "Annoyances". Handles almost all of the random bullshit modals

[-] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

I really dont know. I dont select text while I read it? I get the frustration but what's the majority? If your in the minority I dont think you should be ignored but also I dont know how they cater to everyone.

I say, the majority adopt something they adopt it because that's how the majority like it. If the majority disagrees make changes to suit their needs. If the resources exist to cater to everyone, cater to everyone. If not, as a member of the minority, its on you to find a work around or move on.

[-] nintendiator@feddit.cl 0 points 2 months ago

Oh you sweet innocent child.

I say, the majority adopt something they adopt it because that’s how the majority like it.

In the world of UIs, majorities "adopt" something they adopt because it's the default, imposed, and people tend to just not change the defaults (or it flat out can't be done).

but also I dont know how they cater to everyone

Add it as a tunable in settings? Most stuff has settings, it's marginal zero effort to add a new one.

[-] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

In the world of UIs, majorities “adopt” something they adopt because it’s the default, imposed, and people tend to just not change the defaults (or it flat out can’t be done).

If they willingly adopt it then its not an issue, no?

Add it as a tunable in settings? Most stuff has settings, it’s marginal zero effort to add a new one.

If its so easy they should equally be capable of implementing their own work around, no?

[-] nintendiator@feddit.cl 1 points 1 month ago

Whether its something that people adopted willingly or not makes no difference to whether it's an issue. Most things can still be (or still have to be) improved. And once again, "adopt" is sus. As is "willingly" (are you "willingly" accepting something that marketing tells you to be true?).

If its so easy they should equally be capable of implementing their own work around, no?

That's something that is done sometimes, yes. Say, Librewolf could restore some tunables that were removed from Firefox. But that still depends on how invasive the change is (and on whether you can actually implement a workaround or not, which means you'd need the code, a build system, etc).

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 months ago

This is what you sound like: Xkcd Workflow

[-] Liz@midwest.social 0 points 2 months ago

I do not want the program to react when I left click ordinary text. The program should not anticipate my needs. It should wait until I've told it I need something (with a right click) before doing anything.

[-] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

I’m gonna break your heart then. Until about 15 years ago it used to be that literally all interactable/clickable text was both blue AND UNDERLINED to indicate it was a clickable link. Then some self-important designers with no user experience testing decided that was just too ugly and stopped underlining links to give it a “clean” minimalist look. It was then a trend, so everyone copied it. Now we still live with those consequences :(

[-] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 months ago

Seems more like the writer's problem: everyone else selects text to perform a function. They could point with the mouse or use the bottom of the window as a guide & tap the ↓ key.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

No we don't. Everyone else selects text to select text (with left click), that's how you copy the text, but just as importantly: that's how you select text.

[-] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Seems kinda pointless. Maybe we need a dedicated OS for people to just fidget around for no reason: a cat jungle gym for humans.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

Selecting text, a core functionality of a computer, is pointless?

Highlighting text isn't pointless, even if you don't personally do it.

Some of us struggle with long lines of text (people with varying degrees of dyslexia)

It literally doesn't inconvenience anyone. And is the standard behaviour on most websites that you can select text. Who here is out there complaining about selectable text? It's usually the opposite (because then you can't copy)

I'm not sure you meant to come across a bit shitty, but if you meant to, I'll invite you to think about exercising empathy for your fellow humans before you speak.

Just because you don't use it, doesn't mean it's pointless.

And saying it is, after having it explained why it's useful to others, is not very pleasant.

[-] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 2 months ago

Selecting text, a core functionality of a computer, is pointless?

Can you identify any OS GUI in history that offered text selection without operations to perform on the selection? That was always the core function: select the input of an operation.

Some of us struggle with long lines of text (people with varying degrees of dyslexia)

There are solutions for that: accessibility standards. It's been well researched and is basic to good UI design.

All the problems you point out leading you to do something extra just to read indicate problems addressed by fixing broken accessibility. It'd be better to fix those basic UI problems instead of defend doing extra things we shouldn't have to do that they weren't really designed to do.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yes, practically all the desktop ones. You can just select text with it just selecting the text. On most websites. I'm pretty sure OP is referring to websites that "helpfully" put UI elements in the way after highlighting.

Most text editors do this well, they put the UI elements above the text, not in the way.

The vast, vast, majority of websites still do nothing when you select text.

We're not talking about phones, you typically read that in portrait so the lines are short.

Perhaps I have made an assumption that not everyone was on the same page about.

Selecting text on android also works great with the UI that pops up there. I'm pretty sure we're only talking about annoying websites, on desktop.

[-] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 1 month ago

Seems the question was misread.

Can you identify any OS GUI in history that offered text selection without operations to perform on the selection?
without operations
without

I doubt any early OS designer went "Pure selection is useful on its own. Let's ship that without the ability to do anything to it." then at a later iteration someone went "I have a clever idea: let's add the ability to operate (eg, cut, copy, overwrite) on that selection!". Even the name is suggestive: select. Select for what? Input for something.

It still seems like a criticism that picks over the wrong thing while disregarding a host of deeper problems (eg, noncompliance with accessibility standards) that led them there. Reading is basic: the text size, spacing, line length, contrast should be accessible without extra steps. Font ought to be adjustable from their user agent, so dyslexic users can set a dyslexic font. Selection popovers shouldn't obscure the selection. Etc.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yes, without operations visible. Highlighting text just highlights it on the vast majority of websites on desktop, right now. Unless you're on edge, where it does obscure as soon as you let go of the mouse.

You need to right click, or use keyboard shortcuts to do anything with your highlighted text, unless your browser is getting in the way. Some websites do also get in the way.

And this is exactly what the OP wants (or rather my interpretation):

Selection popovers shouldn't obscure the selection. Etc.

Other programs do this far better. The key complaint is that popups pop up in front of the text.

[-] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 1 month ago

You need to right click, or use keyboard shortcuts to do anything with your highlighted text, unless your browser is getting in the way. Some websites do also get in the way.

You're willfully misreading: those operations are available.

The illustrative story

I doubt any early OS designer went “Pure selection is useful on its own. Let’s ship that without the ability to do anything to it.”

should have made the question clear.

You can't name a single OS now or in history where pure selection is possible yet no operations on the selection are available. It always existed for the sake of enabling operations on selections and never for its own sake. That it's an abortable, multistep process is beside the point: aborting it every time isn't the purpose. You're taking an incidental part of the design that was always a dependency for something else & treating it as a feature unto itself, which it never was. The use case for pure selection is fairly weak.

As stated before, it's a fair question whether the underlying issue (whatever leads people to purely select text) isn't better addressed by accessibility (a design that doesn't tempt them to purely text selection). In any case, an accessible design wouldn't obscure selections.

[-] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I think we've had a big misunderstanding here, partly because I got annoyed for you calling something others use as pointless.

I'm not trying to argue that NOTHING other than text selection should be possible. That would be annoying. From my very first comment is said people highlight to copy text. The very first one. Just that this incidental "feature" of temporarily highlighting text is clearly a useful one. People DO want to just select the text sometimes. But also copy, search, whatever.

Just because you don't use text selection this way, doesn't mean it isn't useful. (The reason I got annoyed at you calling it "pointless", though, I see now this is because of a misunderstanding)

Hell, I do it not only for myself, but when sharing my screen at work, and pointing out specific pieces of text. Makes it very easy to quickly bring my colleagues eyes to the specific spot I'm talking about in the text.

You can't name a single OS now or in history where pure selection is possible yet no operations on the selection are available

This isn't what I'm arguing. Non-copyable text is a great sin. But there are plenty of programs that don't offer a pop-up, off the top of my head: Bluebeam Revu, Notepad++, many web browsers (but as mentioned, not Edge who's implementation of popup options sucks and gets in the way), the list goes on.

I am not against all popups, just the ones that prevent you from reading the text you just highlighted.

This isn't even just an accessibility thing, getting in the way of the text you highlighted is just annoying.

Microblog Memes