[Frances]

Nope, it is not separate In some cases it can be, but in many cases it isn't. You have to choose between making something work more intuitively, or in a more efficient, intelligent manner.

A step by step install guide is more intuitive.

A command line install is less intuitive.

When you have to install 30 applications, would you rather learn a one line command that would then automatically install all applications, or would you rather go through each step by step guide for each application?

This is not such a good example because you could give the user both options, but in UI design it's difficult. You have to choose a way for a tool or interface to work. If you start from the premise that "we should make it work so that the novice user is comfortable", you are inevitably giving up more or less on efficiency and productivity, which would interest the professional user.

In the end you may gain an easier adaptation for novice users, but in the long run you have designed something that is not as efficient as it could be. Sometimes you don't even gain that ease of use. For example, how many keyboard buttons/combinations do you need to know in Rhino to pan/zoom/rotate the camera?

This reminds me of something. Back in the days of AutoCAD for DOS, power users would have drafting contests using only the flip screen.

[Frances]

It's all so relative to the user...take my dad for example. He is very comfortable using AutoCAD (v2002).

Yeah, but this user is already "contaminated" ... meaning, that he is trying to apply the Autocad ways into Rhino.

Actually, Rhinoceros started out as a plug-in for AutoCAD.

[Mihai]

Ergonomics....I don't think that's the right word to describe an "intuitive" UI. I'm arguing here that ergonomics in fact is a combination of intuitiveness and intelligence. The ergonomic part is the fruit of the labour, not part of purely intuitive design.

A purely intuitive UI would be pretty dreadful. You would get something like the Bryce UI where everything is large bright buttons. Like after using it 500 times, you would still need to see the huge button to remember what it does.

I believe the large colorful button mania emerged from this belief that everything should be made as intuitive as possible, to the novice user. This is completely wrong....

You have to stop and think that it may work if your application has maybe 10 functions. But if it has hundreds? What would be easier for a user to recognize when reading a manual? You could write either press the "chamfer" button, or press the "{image of icon}, to chamfer". The user then has to search the UI looking for that particular button, which may look similar to 50 other buttons, and look back and forth between application and manual to remember what the button symbol is supposed to look like. You might as well have put chinese letters as button symbols. If they had done that then people would perhaps have realized that it's not such a good idea after all.

But, it looks more intuitive on a superficial level, all those colorful buttons. It looks less frightening, more casual and "nice".

My point of view is, you should start with analysing how people would like to work, take first an experienced user and hear what he thinks could be improved in terms of speed and number of clicks. Then, take that input and perhaps change it just a little bit so it can become more accesible for the novice.

Otherwise what happens is, the application remains less powerful and you are forcing the experienced user to work less efficiently. All in the name of intuitive design. Intuitive is certainly not ergonomics. It is just a design influence towards a truly ergonomic design. I think you will agree here too. The command line input in Rhino is certainly not part of the intuitive design influence, but of the intelligent one. The intelligent influence in this case has made it more ergonomic.

"Don't make me think" is a great book on designing webpages. But it's philosophy doesn't apply so well to more complex applications where a user has to accomplish much more than just browse through pages.

[Thomas An.]

A purely intuitive UI would be pretty dreadful.

Actually it would be awesome.

I believe the large colorful button mania emerged from this belief that everything should be made as intuitive as possible

That is the wrong perception of "intuitive". It is neither about big buttons, or about colorful buttons. As a matter of fact numerous buttons next to each other blend together like an omelet.

Mihai,

You seem to have made a definition of "intuitive" and then make arguments about as if it was my definition as well.

I did try to define "intuitive" a little further up ... also the Bryce UI was not intuitive as much as you say (I did try Bryce).

IMHO intuitive involves the path of least mental resistance to operate the software. Some software seem elegant (like the syntax of C++ for instance), but dispite that elegance they are not intuitive;; rquiring much mental resources to keep them salient. There have been apps that only had buttons but having no clue of the paradigm we did not know how to use those buttons. This was unintuitive as well.

[Boris Ulzibat]

Ergonomics....

Most of 3D apps have a [professional] mode, when the viewport is maximized and no more buttons are visible.
Big shiny buttons have nothing to do with "intuition".
Intuitive interface is the interface in which you don't need to search all the menus for a "chamfer" button - you guess where it should be.
The case of "unintuitive" thing is for example the way MXED works with reflectance.
When you define the surface it is logical and intuitive that 90 degrees is 90 degrees to the surface, not to the surface normal (or anything this parameter refers to).
So, without adding any buttons this can be made intuitive.
That's my point of view on it.

[michaelplogue]

The ultimate in intuitive UI design..... (this one's for you, whisky!)

[acquiesse]

Hi Frances,

I heard that too

how many keyboard buttons/combinations do you need to know in Rhino to pan/zoom/rotate the camera?

Hi Michai,

I presume you're talking of the keyboard shortcuts which allow you to pan and zoom without using the mouse roll ball...

I learnt these intuitively using the mouse and accidently later on with the keyboard (for precision movement and use with my graphics tablet). In AutoCAD life without a rollerball becomes more complex...

[exit current command]
Z [return]
[return]

What a pain! And for the most used aspect of a 3D program! Photoshop is another with strange zooming... Thank goodness for the Intuous III

I think the process from novice to experienced is very important, it has to look easy and get your way of thinking into sync with the programmers.

With Rhino I tend to go, "I wonder if..." and usually it is there, making progression to complex tools fun With 3DS i go, "where was that tool I thought I had?" Spending the rest of the day getting lost in sub menu's...

Mind you, I'm such a novice compared to you guys...

[Thomas An.]

Most of 3D apps have a [professional] mode, when the viewport is maximized and no more buttons are visible.
Big shiny buttons have nothing to do with "intuition".
Intuitive interface is the interface in which you don't need to search all the menus for a "chamfer" button - you guess where it should be.

Agreed !

The case of "unintuitive" thing is for example the way MXED works with reflectance.
When you define the surface it is logical and intuitive that 90 degrees is 90 degrees to the surface, not to the surface normal (or anything this parameter refers to).
So, without adding any buttons this can be made intuitive.
That's my point of view on it.

It is also true, that there are conventions in our high school physics books that are counter-intuitive... but ... In this case reflectance 0 means we are looking at a "wall" straight on (this is our normal daily way of looking at walls ). In daily life if we look at a surface any other way we feel we look at them at an "angle".

[Thomas An.]

With Rhino I tend to go, "I wonder if..." and usually it is there, making progression to complex tools fun

Exactly !
As if the designer was so empathic that they anticipate *where* the user will look for things when they need them. This is a very hard thing to accomplish and if not carefull, it is all too easy to end up with an overly abstract interface, where we are called to memorize a gazillion things.

[acquiesse]

Exactly !

So now we have decided Rhino is great, can we have an update to our plugin please

[Thomas An.]

The ultimate in intuitive UI design..... (this one's for you, whisky!)

Actually this is not an ideal UI.
The first impulse would be to use the mouse pointer (the pointer is the impersonation of our hand) ... explore what click+drag does (or right click+drag does)... also we want to see what double-click does (knock-knock). If these things do not do anything to the view navigation (or do other things, like popup menus etc) from the get-go then the UI does not pass the sniff-test.

...so we first want to reach in and "grab" things. The buttons are not the first thing to a good UI (counter to what some designers think). Also, these buttons by looking at them mean nothing. And the whole UI looks busy with graphics. This is not a good UI even for children

[Thomas An.]

Exactly !

So now we have decided Rhino is great, can we have an update to our plugin please

Yeah , what are they thinking ... prioritizing lesser apps over Rhino

[acquiesse]

Yeah , what are they thinking ... prioritizing lesser apps over Rhino

Lol, we understand the prioritising but a little promise of an update would be greatly appreciated

Not to side track your topic...

[jdp]

That may be...or it may be that at the core of personality...some people naturally think verb > noun, rather than noun > verb. So Rhino just allows both...and in doing so, provides even more confusion for a certain subset of users.

[edit: actually, Rhino allows an Acad-style workflow, so how is it that 'Acad contamination' could be a factor? as I said above, it's the multiplicity of options that provides the confusion, rather than prior expectation.]

as far as I know this is exactly a bad practice in UI design, including webdesign. bringing 2 ways for doing the same thing is simply not ergonomic, because our brain is designed to save space and memory (back in the past we human were selected to act really fast and to exclude unnecessary information). But the problem which design is better still stands...

[michaelplogue]

This is not a good UI even for children

whisky will be so disappointed....