Comments on: Switcher annoyances http://terrychay.com/blog/article/switcher-annoyances.shtml You tell that other boy, not to touch the woodwork... Sat, 22 Nov 2008 00:35:13 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-hemorrhage hourly 1 By: r-echos » Blog Archive » Fitts’ law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia http://terrychay.com/blog/article/switcher-annoyances.shtml#comment-2202 r-echos » Blog Archive » Fitts’ law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Wed, 17 May 2006 23:26:27 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/192.shtml#comment-2202 [...] (Via The Woodwork) [...] [...] (Via The Woodwork) [...]

]]> By: tychay http://terrychay.com/blog/article/switcher-annoyances.shtml#comment-1904 tychay Wed, 26 Apr 2006 19:29:43 +0000 http://terrychay.com/blog/article/192.shtml#comment-1904 AppleMatters has an editorial <a href="http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comments/human-interface-guidelines-have-you-been-conned/" title="Human Interface Guidelines: The Mac Zealots' Con?" rel="nofollow">about the Human Interface Guidelines con</a>. The problem I have with the article is that I never believed, nor espoused either myth. In fact, I think Apple HIG is a joke since Mac OS X as it is an evolving standard in which the most blatant violator is Apple itself. I bring this up because people might read my article and half-hearted defense of the one button mouse as bashing people with Apple HIG. If you read that article, then this one again, I hope you see that it is not the case at all. BTW, he's full of shit when he writes: “So why did the one-button mouse survive over 20 years? Because Apple wanted it to, so it wrote the HIG to ensure it would.” The one-button mouse survived because Apple wanted it to, but the HIG guideline for it predates two button mice becoming dominant (1995). It’s fine to be all offended about zealots, but that doesn’t excuse having the cart lead the horse. (Having said this, HIG is not a OS-relative set of conventions. There are some sets of conventions that are demonstrably better than other sets no matter what the conditions. <a href="http://terrychay.com/blog/article/intuit-ive-ui.shtml" title="Non-Intuit(ive) UI" rel="nofollow">"Yes" "No" "Cancel" from the Windows world</a> is fundamentally inferior, and you are going to be fighting an uphill battle if you going to argue that this semantic is a good thing.) AppleMatters has an editorial about the Human Interface Guidelines con.

The problem I have with the article is that I never believed, nor espoused either myth. In fact, I think Apple HIG is a joke since Mac OS X as it is an evolving standard in which the most blatant violator is Apple itself.

I bring this up because people might read my article and half-hearted defense of the one button mouse as bashing people with Apple HIG. If you read that article, then this one again, I hope you see that it is not the case at all. BTW, he’s full of shit when he writes: “So why did the one-button mouse survive over 20 years? Because Apple wanted it to, so it wrote the HIG to ensure it would.” The one-button mouse survived because Apple wanted it to, but the HIG guideline for it predates two button mice becoming dominant (1995). It’s fine to be all offended about zealots, but that doesn’t excuse having the cart lead the horse.

(Having said this, HIG is not a OS-relative set of conventions. There are some sets of conventions that are demonstrably better than other sets no matter what the conditions. “Yes” “No” “Cancel” from the Windows world is fundamentally inferior, and you are going to be fighting an uphill battle if you going to argue that this semantic is a good thing.)

]]>