Usability Quote of the Day

February 9, 2012

Most people who encounter computer-based automation at work do not choose the software with which they work, and have comparatively little control over when and how they do what they do. For them, the use of computers can be an oppressive experience, rather than a liberating one. -- Sarah Kuhn, Bringing Design to Software, edited by Terry Winograd, 1996    (via interaction-design.org)

Monday, September 19, 2005

Consistency in Design is the Wrong Approach

An argument for using the user's current knowledge as a guide rather than consistency ...

Current Knowledge is a much better way to think about the problem.

Consistency in design is about making elements uniform — having them look and behave the same way. We often hear designers talk about consistent navigation, consistent page layouts, or consistent control elements. In each case, the designer is looking for a way to leverage the usability by creating uniformity. After all, if the user learns to operate the design in one place, why not have that knowledge transfer to the next. This is all good. But wrong.

For example, let’s look at the problem I discussed a while back by our friends from Avis.com. They chose to use the asterisk (*) to denote optional fields instead of denoting mandatory fields. Less than 10% of the fields on the entire site are optional. If they were consistent with the outside world, entire forms would have every field denoted with an asterisk. That might create its own problems."   continued ...   (Via UIE Brain Sparks )

No Asterisk - User Interface Design, Human Computer Interaction (HCI), Ergonomics

Go with user knowledge.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home

<< Home
.