Tough words about GUI

[graham]

Terms like "cognitive patterns" and "evolutionary biology"

Yes these are just the hype terminolgy used to make marketing 'experts' seem like experts. However, forget the terminology, forget the hype, forget the marketing speak and you can see ity is Not all crap in practice. Perception is greater than reality when it comes to sales, not so with repeat sales though. The greatest and best technical products fall by the wayside if they are not packaged and presented to meet the expectations of potential buyers.
With respect to XY for the winxp market it is great and I don't think it can be made better (well everything can be made better but at a silly cost). For the Win 7 market it will, in a year or so, look old and less interesting. Sad fact is that the look of products attracts new users to take a more indepth examination but if they don't look they don't buy!

I am not trying to start a competition about winxp or win7 as to which is better that is irrelevant. The simple fact is win7 and win8? will dominate the market in a few years and buyers will by then have 'tuned' in to the win 7 look and feel (of course if you stay on winxp then you are immune). You can assign marketing speak and practice to the waste bin but if done properly it works. I studied marketing for some years and believe me it is not a simple task or just the gloss on product packaging. Good marketing starts with identifying the market segments and product design to meet these. Get this wrong and like product pricing you win or lose. I suspect many product developers are not interested in sales or volume but those translate into revenue and profit. XYplorer web site is a very good example of winning new customers but the target keeps moving.

[admin]

Terms like "cognitive patterns" and "evolutionary biology"

Yes these are just the hype terminolgy used to make marketing 'experts' seem like experts. However, forget the terminology, forget the hype, forget the marketing speak and you can see ity is Not all crap in practice. Perception is greater than reality when it comes to sales, not so with repeat sales though. The greatest and best technical products fall by the wayside if they are not packaged and presented to meet the expectations of potential buyers.
With respect to XY for the winxp market it is great and I don't think it can be made better (well everything can be made better but at a silly cost). For the Win 7 market it will, in a year or so, look old and less interesting. Sad fact is that the look of products attracts new users to take a more indepth examination but if they don't look they don't buy!

I am not trying to start a competition about winxp or win7 as to which is better that is irrelevant. The simple fact is win7 and win8? will dominate the market in a few years and buyers will by then have 'tuned' in to the win 7 look and feel (of course if you stay on winxp then you are immune). You can assign marketing speak and practice to the waste bin but if done properly it works. I studied marketing for some years and believe me it is not a simple task or just the gloss on product packaging. Good marketing starts with identifying the market segments and product design to meet these. Get this wrong and like product pricing you win or lose. I suspect many product developers are not interested in sales or volume but those translate into revenue and profit. XYplorer web site is a very good example of winning new customers but the target keeps moving.

Yes, the target keeps moving. But it's moving ever slower since the beginning of home computing. Although media hype tends to stress that speed is going up every day, it's not true with regard to upgrading OSs. In the 80's and 90s when relatively few and relatively expert people were into PCs and companies were just beginning to get into dependency on MS products, it was easy to "upgrade the world" from Windows X to Windows X + 1. But now, with 100s of millions of non-expert users and companies heavily depending on a working OS, change can only be much slower. I bet WinXP will still be among us for a very long time...

Another point concerning "the user" is that only a certain type of user will ever give money for a file manager. And my impression is that those users are leaning more to the functional side than to the glossy. While the latter (functional vs glossy) does not have to be a contradiction, IMO (and not only mine) the Vista/Win7 gloss is counter-functional. From which follows that tuning into the Win7 look & feel might be equivalent to tuning out of my users. At least the possibility has to be kept in mind...

[j_c_hallgren]

Another point concerning "the user" is that only a certain type of user will ever give money for a file manager. And my impression is that those users are leaning more to the functional side than to the glossy. While the latter (functional vs glossy) does not have to be a contradiction, IMO (and not only mine) the Vista/Win7 gloss is counter-functional. From which follows that tuning into the Win7 look & feel might be equivalent to tuning out of my users. At least the possibility has to be kept in mind...

Exactly! For example, a lot of ppl I chat with online said that Aero was just a waste and never use it...looks nice (glossy), but no value...so there needs to be a way to keep both types of users happy...skins maybe?

And based on some of the screenshots posted here, I also wonder about what made them think those wild color schemes look better than XY defaults.

[admin]

And based on some of the screenshots posted here, I also wonder about what made them think those wild color schemes look better than XY defaults.

Truer words have never been spoken...

[graham]

JC quote:

Exactly! For example, a lot of ppl I chat with online said that Aero was just a waste and never use it...looks nice (glossy), but no value...so there needs to be a way to keep both types of users happy...skins maybe?

You need to use it before you base judgements on others - Aero Peek is a probably the single best non-tech feature in Win 7 - as good as mini-tree in XY!

[nas8e9]

You need to use it before you base judgements on others - Aero Peek is a probably the single best non-tech feature in Win 7 - as good as mini-tree in XY!

For my money, the new taskbar (more UX than UI perhaps) as well as Aero Peek (improved over Vista) are major improvements. Non-UI, the much-improved smoothness (speed is according to various benchmarks not that different from Vista) even on slower/older hardware, is a major feature.

Aero can (and for power users, should) be customized: just search for "Adjust the appearance and performance of Windows". I'd recommend disabling all the fading as well as the smooth-scrolling of list boxes.

I've used XP myself for years, followed by a good year of Vista x64. Given the choice, I'll take Windows 7 x64 even if I didn't use virtualization.

[zer0]

Same here. Terms like "cognitive patterns" and "evolutionary biology" ring in my ears like chocolate and cream in other people's ears. Now we can start talking.

Great! Let's get cracking.

It's a well-known fact that XYplorer has a lot of features that are accessible using the GUI All of those features can be classed into two categories: FRONT and BACK. The FRONT features are the ones most of us use very often (so we are more familiar with them) and BACK are the ones we use infrequently (if ever). That's not to say that they are redundant, not all -- while we may use them less often, we do rely on them being there. If we psychologically increase the motivation of people to use those BACK features, people will get even better value out of XYplorer -- value is very important to humans. Nearly everything has a value and the greater it is the more we care, so we engage emotionally. In order to psychologically increase a value of a GUI and reduce user friction, the GUI's usability would need improvement.

Let's think about this: what do we know about people? We're afraid of change (no connotation needed ), we like patterns (they reduce change and create logical links in our cognition), we like to order and organise things (to be more efficient and better at something), we're lazy (no offence! ), we're highly visual thinkers and learners (images and colours that we can identify with in the real-world), we respond to our name and first-person clues (why do you think they called "My Documents" like that? ) and we don't like making choices even though we like choice (the most famous study to support the former was by Mark R. Lepper and Sheena S. Iyengar).

So how can we apply the above to create an engaging GUI?

1. Fear of change -- research shows that humans are masters of selective perception and learn quickly (for good or bad) to ignore what doesn't relate to what they are trying to do. Gradual -- just like evolution -- transformation of XY's GUI would reduce the "shock factor". We like to be shocked though, as long as it's a positive surprise.
2. We like patterns -- when designing an interface, it's crucial for similar items to be grouped together in a correct sequence. It's important to note that grouping must be done by goal (for example, do something with a file) rather than category ("Edit" menu). We are goal-driven. We want to move a file, we don't want to edit its location. Our cognitive pattern revolves around what happens to a file, rather than its properties.
3. Order and organisation -- this relates back to patterns. Having a GUI that is organised in a particular order -- either as we want it or as we still like it -- allows us to focus on our work and not have to think (lazy? see below ) where things are. We start to form instincts and do things intuitively -- thanks to a flexible GUI that conforms to our personality, we see how we think of the screen Allowing of Drag-and-Drop functionality (not forgetting a lock) of GUI components will come under this heading.
4. We're lazy -- life is difficult enough, so if given a way to do things easier and thus faster we are very likely to take it. XY GUI design needs to embrace the concept of least completion time, which is currently high for BACK features. Fewer dialogue windows, fewer pull-out menus, less menu text -- either we don't have time to read or we can't be bothered, or both. Software should "know" this and not derail our train of thought with dialogue windows and text that we have to read. How many times have you been interrupted for a minute and then couldn't think of what you were doing/talking about before the interruption? It does mean that XY will have to make assumptions, but they will be educated assumptions.
5. We're highly visual -- a picture tells a thousand words: a cliché but true. XY GUI needs to have more visual clues to make it more intuitive. We process images quicker than text. XY's GUI is too textual. An image is one of the first non-verbal forms of communication in humans. Stone Age people have been carving and drawing on rocks. Thousands of years later, we still "adore" images. Images engage our cognitive, psychomotor and affective domains. Here's an interesting paper on the subject: http://celt.ust.hk/TLSymp/paper/21_li_celt%20v2.pdf for those who want to delve deeper
6. Our name and first-person clues -- My Documents/Music/Pictures/etc. We identify with and relate to things that "get personal". It establishes a bond between a person and the other party. This bond relies on trust: another benefit. XY GUI needs to become more personal, more relevant to who's using this software. An example: user-defined commands. I cannot help but feel abstracted from this feature. In all honesty, the way it's called makes me think that some user, from somewhere, defined some commands . Obviously, it was me who did it, but I don't feel that way. What if it's called "My/Your Commands"? There is no doubt that those are my commands. It makes me feel more in control and secure thus strengthening trust.
7. Choice, not choices -- in XYplorer, there are at least 5 different ways to cut a file -- all of which involve GUI. Excessive choice bloats GUI, especially if we're set on 1 or 2 ways in which to do something. Through sensible reduction of choice, we'll remove redundancy from XY's GUI, but still provide flexibility, where the situation warrants it.

Wow, that's a mouthful! Thanks for reading to those who made it to these words

[j_c_hallgren]

A few comments:

We're highly visual -- a picture tells a thousand words: a cliché but true. XY GUI needs to have more visual clues to make it more intuitive. We process images quicker than text. XY's GUI is too textual.

Too textual? Maybe to some but not to me! Yes, I use TB icons and such but there are some appl's that use more visuals/graphics and I have a real problem using them...of course, I spent 20 or so yrs using just a dumb terminal with only text so...

Our name and first-person clues -- My Documents/Music/Pictures/etc. We identify with and relate to things that "get personal". It establishes a bond between a person and the other party.

I've been using Windows since 3.1 and I still find the "My xxxxx" naming scheme somewhat silly and too oriented to the typical "dumb user"....if there was a way to even remove the "My" from all these and not affect my sys, I'd do it in a heartbeat...maybe it's due to my background in mainframes...but there are way too many hooks and things that depend on this scheme.

Choice, not choices -- in XYplorer, there are at least 5 different ways to cut a file -- all of which involve GUI. Excessive choice bloats GUI, especially if we're set on 1 or 2 ways in which to do something. Through sensible reduction of choice, we'll remove redundancy from XY's GUI, but still provide flexibility, where the situation warrants it.

Agreed that there a sometimes various ways to do same/similar things but this also makes it easier to adapt to as the menu/opt I may prefer and/or find memorable may not be the menu/opt you do...and in some cases, there may be some things that could be reduced but as long as it doesn't make it harder to do that function...like moving a function to a sub-menu can make it less convenient to access but this may be offset by better access to other items in main menu.

[graham]

As JC said things like MY Doc.... , Folders, etc do make me wince and like JC my background was from mainframes. All that is reasonable for people like us and this is where we have to give way. The modern PC is not a mainframe and the display is not monochrome text only and the typical users are not technically oriented. I still wince every time I look at a pc and see the 'desktop' covered with icons - mine has none!

That all said the users are what matters when it comes to sales and development. The typical PC user today is totally non-computer literate though many convince themselves they are experts. And that is the problem, self proclaimed experts generally haven't a clue as to the inner workings or more generally the importance and significance of files. XY is in fact a very dangerous tool in the hands of the stupid and this is why I think the Win 7 file explorer is 'dumbed down'. It is aimed at the idiot and assumes most tasks are simple find and copy, paste or store and in this regard despite the critical reviews from many in the XY forum I actually think it is an excellant design. If you want to to 'proper' file management it is a total disaster! From this we can assume that MS do not want a proficient file manager and are happy to leave that to the likes of XY and in the process it saves money. They have also, in win 7 gone a long way to attempt to protect the security of crucial system files from the 'experts - idiots' and hopefully, in the process made the OS both secure and resilient.

Back to XY - I personally believe the tool as it stands meets the need of expert file users but for casual users like me it has a major problem. It does not help me carry out some tasks unless I devour the help guides and experiment. In this regard I would like for XY to make life a bit more intuitive for certain medium use tasks. I have on more than one occasion got annoyed trying to rename files and this is down to me - I don't use this feature enough to get good at it but also XY does not help me get there easily.

[zer0]

Choice, not choices -- in XYplorer, there are at least 5 different ways to cut a file -- all of which involve GUI. Excessive choice bloats GUI, especially if we're set on 1 or 2 ways in which to do something. Through sensible reduction of choice, we'll remove redundancy from XY's GUI, but still provide flexibility, where the situation warrants it.

Agreed that there a sometimes various ways to do same/similar things but this also makes it easier to adapt to as the menu/opt I may prefer and/or find memorable may not be the menu/opt you do...and in some cases, there may be some things that could be reduced but as long as it doesn't make it harder to do that function...like moving a function to a sub-menu can make it less convenient to access but this may be offset by better access to other items in main menu.

Yes, a reduction would not make it more difficult to access, but will make a GUI smarter in terms of appearance and functionality. Using "Cut" as an example again -- a KS stroke, a button and a right-click option will all but suffice, so that will result in 40% fewer GUI components. That percentage will fluctuate for all tasks. It is likely to be higher for FRONT features and lower for BACK features.

It's important emphasise that people complaining about a redesign (or notion thereof) isn't a bad thing. If a redesigned GUI will have (and XY's will have ) better usability, people will grow to like it. Better usability is the goal, not a redesign purely for the sake of "staying fresh"

Another pointer to mull over is how a GUI is displayed. By that I mean how much horizontal and vertical space is used. These days, manufacturers of monitors practically abandoned 4:3 screens and moved on to 16:10 or 16:9. This means that there's substantially less vertical space than horizontal. That is a contributing factor to why menu bars are on their way out.

[Minimax]

Another pointer to mull over is how a GUI is displayed. By that I mean how much horizontal and vertical space is used. These days, manufacturers of monitors practically abandoned 4:3 screens and moved on to 16:10 or 16:9. This means that there's substantially less vertical space than horizontal. That is a contributing factor to why menu bars are on their way out.

A good start would be to pay "08 - Vertical Preview Panel right of the file list(s)" more attention.

By the way very interesting read about HCI and evolving GUI design. Thanks to all active participants.

[j_c_hallgren]

Another pointer to mull over is how a GUI is displayed. By that I mean how much horizontal and vertical space is used. These days, manufacturers of monitors practically abandoned 4:3 screens and moved on to 16:10 or 16:9. This means that there's substantially less vertical space than horizontal. That is a contributing factor to why menu bars are on their way out.

And also the form factor of netbooks is another thing to consider...these have smaller screens but are also more widescreen (not sure of typical specs)...however, let's make sure that we don't cause a problem for those of us who will still be using 4:3 laptops/monitors for quite some years to come....having options to take advantage of 16:9 is fine...just don't assume/presume that it's the standard when designing layouts...both sizes need at least equal care.

And I'm not the only one with a smaller 1024x768 screen...see http://www.xyplorer.com/xyfc/viewtopic. ... 115#p42115

[jacky]

As JC said things like MY Doc.... , Folders, etc do make me wince and like JC my background was from mainframes.

I got no background in mainframes, but I hate those "my" thinggy as well. Actually, to me a "User-Defined Command" is something I'm fine with, I would also have no problem with "Custom Commands" or the likes, but "My Commands" makes me cringe.

As for the Win7 look, I don't like it as that much either, but I've never been one who's attracted to shinny GUIs. I'd much rather have a well thought-out, simple, clean & efficient GUI than a big shinny one. One thing I particularly hate with this new trend, is to see that where a simple 16x16 icon used to be fine, now it seems people want to have 128x128 icons at the very least. I just can't stand that, what a waste it is (to me). Not saying a slightly bigger icon is a bad thing, but just because we have higher resolution doesn't mean we can waste pixels by the dozen for nothing...

Using "Cut" as an example again -- a KS stroke, a button and a right-click option will all but suffice, so that will result in 40% fewer GUI components.

I need help on that one : which "Cut" do you wanna remove? Because saying that the one from menu Edit should go is a very bad idea IMO, as that might be the first place a few people will go looking for it. The List context menu is also a normal place where we expect to see such command, the TB button is also common, and of course optional, and the KS isn't part of it.
Having different ways to achieve the same thing is a good thing, not a bad thing. Looking as that "Cut" command, I don't see what should be changed: it's where one expects to find it: on menu Edit, which is also available on the right-click context menu (as expected, again), and one can have a TB button for it if one wants too, or use a KS for those who are more keyboard than GUI.

[zer0]

As JC said things like MY Doc.... , Folders, etc do make me wince and like JC my background was from mainframes.

I got no background in mainframes, but I hate those "my" thinggy as well. Actually, to me a "User-Defined Command" is something I'm fine with, I would also have no problem with "Custom Commands" or the likes, but "My Commands" makes me cringe.

Psychological research speaks the opposite. While some people may not like those terms, they do represent a common theme across the Windows platform.

As for the Win7 look, I don't like it as that much either, but I've never been one who's attracted to shinny GUIs. I'd much rather have a well thought-out, simple, clean & efficient GUI than a big shinny one. One thing I particularly hate with this new trend, is to see that where a simple 16x16 icon used to be fine, now it seems people want to have 128x128 icons at the very least. I just can't stand that, what a waste it is (to me). Not saying a slightly bigger icon is a bad thing, but just because we have higher resolution doesn't mean we can waste pixels by the dozen for nothing...

Now then, who said Win 7 look? I sense that there is a negative connotation regarding a big shiny GUI. I think that a "well thought-out, simple, clean & efficient GUI" need not look like a dog's dinner. Bear in mind that attractive things work better according to evolutionary biology. Of course, they have to ACTUALLY BE better "under the hood", but XYplorer has that in spades. A clean interface is not the most important thing -- functionality that's easy to access is .

Re: varying icon sizes, I am not surprised at that trend. I am confident that two major reasons for that are: increasing screen sizes (hence the larger resolutions and need for bigger icons) being more affordable and changes in HCI (especially a growing popularity of touch displays and tablet PCs). Perhaps a GUI solution to this would be to support multi-icon resources and have a default icon size set appropriate to screen resolution with an option to increase/decrease.

Using "Cut" as an example again -- a KS stroke, a button and a right-click option will all but suffice, so that will result in 40% fewer GUI components.

I need help on that one : which "Cut" do you wanna remove? Because saying that the one from menu Edit should go is a very bad idea IMO, as that might be the first place a few people will go looking for it. The List context menu is also a normal place where we expect to see such command, the TB button is also common, and of course optional, and the KS isn't part of it.

The ones I thought of "relegating" are the one in the "Edit" menu and also have one possible KS combo for it (either Ctrl + X or just via a command ID, not both). Technically, it won't be relegated as such, but instead I am thinking of morphing it with the TB button. The sticky issue is that transforming the GUI will mean that a lot (if not all) of the Menu bar will be transformed into a more graphical interface. Perhaps this won't be the case on the "classic" look (if having two distinct styles would be deemed sensible and worth the extra maintenance effort by Don).

Having different ways to achieve the same thing is a good thing, not a bad thing. Looking as that "Cut" command, I don't see what should be changed: it's where one expects to find it: on menu Edit, which is also available on the right-click context menu (as expected, again), and one can have a TB button for it if one wants too, or use a KS for those who are more keyboard than GUI.

Since, ideally, the textual Menu bar would morph with the toolbar, one wouldn't need to go into Menu bar's "Edit". Through GUI enhancements, a person would be able to visually make a quick determination how to proceed. Once again, ideally, three ways *should* be plenty: an icon-button, a KS combo and the context menu. From my research, I noticed that the Menu bar is in the process of either being phased out completely or transformed into a better interface. A well thought-out, as you said, transformation of it will help people get over the "shock". Better usability of the GUI will be a pleasant surprise and we, as people, like that

[admin]

The GUI thing that's bugging me most is the toolbar (and some other) icons lacking real transparency. Now yesterday's snow brought inspiration! I decided to stop all other work until I have managed real transparent icons (might take some days). If it works out as planned then the icons will also be fully skinnable, i.e. you can easily create/share your own set using any imaging software.