Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?
Take advantage of Black Friday with 15% off sitewide with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" on Slashdot Deals (some exclusions apply)". ×

Submission + - User Interface Deevolution

BrendaEM writes: Cell phones and tablets brought challenges with user interface design. Their hardware and screen real-estate was limited, but now small hardware has advanced to where the average cellphone or tablet is often comparable in power and resolution to some current laptops and desktops. Now, the user interface compensations we used on devices are encroaching on the desktop.

We still have square rectangles on our screen like we did in the 1990's. Now we put a fingers on virtual objects depicted with pointy corners that look like an even older vintage Timex Sinclair application. Or, perhaps we have a large dissociated circle floating in space, a GUI widget not near any others for some reason.

Both IOS and Android are starting to do multiple windows now. We got cut and paste a long time back. Soon, we may even edit a URL in a browser without it easily disappearing. Maybe even we can have a forward delete key on our virtual keyboards without replacing the original.

We have a lot less icons, and a lot more text because we need 1,000 words to be remind us that 1,000 words are better, and quicker. There is often have no borders around our icons to make it harder to fathom where one idea ends and another idea begins. There are fewer colors in the icons. Now it is just a little harder to tell an apple from an orange, from a billiard ball, because when you are in a hurry, you want to carefully examine the edges of things, and not just look for a quick splotch of color.

When we do have color, we may have white text on a bright yellow background, but more importantly, there are just random colors applied to things, instead of anything that would hint at anything we might want to know.

You open a menu, and we are greeted with an assortment of little overlays with a choice in each instead of a single overlay filled with choices, because someone was infatuated with the way an OS deals out overlay items internally. Like a map we see our application peeking out through the streets, and we can almost make out the information they portray.

Most of the drop shadows are gone now because we never lifted a paper from our desk to read it. Objects in the real world cast no shadows. Apparently it's pretty hard to darken part of an image, as if they removed the OpenGL multiply routine, and there is no Directx equivalent.

A search box takes place of meaningful organization. We are not supposed to arrange what information we gather with our computer in any useful context. Perhaps, files and folders will be replaced by a flat file scheme, like CPM had. If people who are confused by files and folders ever saw a physical filing cabinet, or had a coloring book when they were a child, it would all make sense to them. Perhaps if I never had to put things away at home, I would understand them.

Everything is "clean," now. Usefulness, features, power, and functionality must have been dirt. We have single pane file managers because we only move things from place--to a thing no one seem to understand: another place. We only have one or two power schemes because we never really wanted a little extra speed or time.

First, we had programs, then "managers," and now the "managers" have "centers," because they aren't paying for their--I mean: our computers. They aren't paying for memory, SSDs, or hard drives. They don't care how long we need to wait, not when their program is most important, ever. Perhaps they have lost their facilities, or have a complex.

They are just devices. They are more powerful than any affordable computer from ten years back, but they are just devices, so don't expect too much from the software. We are only supposed to consume on our devices, not create content.

Yet, there are times when I create content on my devices, in spite of everything they have done.

Comment Re:Well.... (Score 3, Interesting) 712

I agree.

Police are supposed to protect the peace--not be thoughtless killing machines. We live in a time, when anyone wants to die, that's all they need do, is antagonize a police officer. They are that reliable.

We checks and balances were supposed to be on police officers have obviously failed.

I witnessed firsthand police aggression, when a police officer tried coercing me to take his version of the truth while taking a statement. I had to raise my hands and step back because I thought he was going to kill me. Try dealing with that after you have been hit by a car.

I was playing poker the other night... with Tarot cards. I got a full house and 4 people died. -- Steven Wright