• kbal@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      73
      ·
      7 months ago

      “The only intuitive interface is the nipple. After that, it’s all learned.” — traditional 20th-century folk wisdom.

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        7 months ago

        And that’s precisely why QA still exists and why it shouldn’t be the devs. And yet, you’ll still wind up with weird situations, despite your best efforts!

        • Aceticon@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Yeah.

          Any good software developer is going to account for and even test all the weird situations they can think of … and not the ones they cannot think of as they’re not even aware of those as a possibility (if they were they would account for and test them).

          Which is why you want somebody with a different mindset to independently come up with their own situations.

          It’s not a value judgment on the quality of the developer, it’s just accounting for, at a software development process level, the fact that humans are not all knowing, not even devs ;)

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        and this is an incredibly valuable reason to have a technically simple UI, because it fundamentally limits the amount of stupid shit people can do, without it being the fault of the designer.

      • UnRelatedBurner@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        This is very perfectionist. Let me install my doors the way it’s comfortable or pleasing. Where I see a knob I’ll reach. And where I see a “pull” sign I pull, or get contex clues.

        There is research for everything, let’s say it’s more comfortable to push and the knob is on the right side for me. I could spend way more time and effort than thia desrves to apeal to that study, “I have great UX”, I’d tell myself. But then I’d show this product on some eastern market where they read in “reverse” and it’ll not be comfortable nor “100% natural” for them. Meaning, I’d fail, my UX’d be horrible for half the planet.

        This might be worth for universal things, that are already researched and you don’t need to spend years and a kidney to figure out. Like maybe how are “next”, “cancel” and “back” buttons are next to each other. But I mean… just copy the most recent you used.

        • Mango@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          7 months ago

          You might have noticed at some point that for knobs are universally at the same height and same for light switches in houses that don’t suck.

      • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        there’s a difference between trying to open a door from the hinged side, vs designing a door that has 14 different deadbolts, and three latches on it.

        One of those is user error, the other is designed complexity generally being a hindrance to the user.

      • Telorand@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Maybe you need better signage. Maybe you need to reverse the direction of the door. Maybe you could automate the door. Or maybe the user is just fucking stupid. 😄

        • Mango@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          The philosophy is that the user’s intuition is never wrong because that’s what we’re trying to accommodate.

          • pingveno@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Also, if you have to post a sign, it’s probably broken by design. Users don’t read.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        “Wrong way” for whom?

        In Software Development it ultimatelly boils down to “are making software for the end users or are you making it for yourself?”

        Because in your example, that’s what ultimatelly defines whose “wrong” the developer is supposed to guide him/herself by.

        (So yeah, making software for fun or you own personal use is going to follow quite different requirement criteria than making software for use by other people).