My biggest complaint is regarding web sites/applications that basically ignore the existence of keyboards. Some of this comes from the UI toolkit that they're using, but it's pretty egregious. For just "brochure" web sites, it's not that big of a deal, but some are really, really bad about tabbing order, or tabbing at all, and certain controls don't work correctly without the mouse/touch.
I am a paying customer and it has always stand out for me in terms of UX. The only problem I see is that sometimes when I am editing a page I need to use the mouse because the keyboard just does not work in the way I am used to. This is a huge UX pain and I don't understand how didn't they fix it yet.
I keep seeing websites use those things, and it drives me utterly insane. Not only is it an onscreen keyboard, but nothing stays still when I'm using the damn thing. I hope more websites don't think it's a good idea.
> unfamiliar, a bit clunky and alienating (most graphical languages)
IMO the largest issue with them is UX, specifically input part of that. Keyboard is very fast and very precise, but it's only good if you're working on plain text or something not too far from it.
The keyboards seem to be very divisive. I know a lot of people who like them or don't mind them. I flat out cannot use them, and not for lack of trying.
Some of the defaults are just plain bad and assume you never want or need to use another computer. The scroll wheel thing is particularly bad. Like imagine if Apple decided all their laptops now were going to come with Dvorak keyboards instead of Qwerty. "Sorry Gram, I need to change your keyboard layout before I can solve your computer problem".
Don't mess with users' muscle memories for your design for literally no gain. That's bad design.
There's a ton here, virtually all of which I agree with strongly and have long-harbored and deep frustrations with.
I've addressed a number of them in "The Tyranny of the Minimum Viable User", arguing that this is a case of Gresham's Law and market interactions, in a domain with a tremendous range of human capabilities. The result though is a disenfranchisement of more capable users.
There's the whole matter of computer inputs, and the tremendous and persistent utility of keyboards.
There's my immense frustration with mobile computing, where a near perfect set of physical characteristics (form-factor, self-supporting-but-removeable cases, stow-away keyboards) are sabotaged at every possible point by atrocious and user-hostile OS and application design and lock-down, crippled storage and capabilities, gratuitously thwarting advanced use. The lack of form-factor and compatibility standardisation means that keyboard- and case-pairing to devices requires not manufacturer but model-specific compatibility. Warrenties are not honoured (Logitech). Devices aren't updated (Samsung/Google).
On the failure of systems to cross-reference, I give you Pocket, which absolutely and deliberately stymies advanced use and actively gets worse the more you use it. I've submitted long and detailed feedback to Pocket (now part of Mozilla), and whilst acknowleged, there's been absolutely no movement on any of these, even the simplest, such as incremenetal search through my copious tag classification. It literally takes several minutes to swipe through this by hand. The application -- intended for long-form reading -- has no search-in-page functionality.
What do people map control to then? The fundamental problem for this era of computing seems to be that people's needs/workflows are fragmenting while devices are converging, becoming more proprietary and one-size-fits-all.
Will there be a backlash to this? Possibly, but if dealing with a shitty keyboard is the cost of getting a high-end machine with great build quality, maybe not. People will come up with more and more workarounds to fix something which wasn't a problem a few years ago.
There are loads of rants out there that are easy to find, but personally it's mostly: you can't use it without looking at it to make sure the buttons are what you think they are (nearly always context-sensitive, often surprising when it decides it's a new context), and where you think they are (can't go by feel, so you need to visually re-calibrate constantly). Button size and positioning varies widely, and nearly all of them have a keyboard shortcut already that doesn't require hand movement or eyes (or at worst previously had an F-key that never moved).
The main exception being things like controlling a progress bar (mouse works fine for me, though it's a neat demo), or changing system brightness/volume with a flick or drag (which is the one thing I find truly better... but I'd happily trade it back for a fn toggle and F keys). But that's so rarely useful.
Not to mention no tactile feedback (deal-breaker for any serious typist) and
ridiculous amounts of screen real estate lost to an onscreen keyboard
(deal-breaker for any serious programmer).
We will one day have something to replace the keyboard - but it won't be the
touchscreen.
This was my exact experience. They provide a UI that doesn't allow me to type and then immediately after I'm done using it and want to get feedback I need to type? No thanks.
They've gotten worse; the physical buttons disappeared. One step closer to useless. No tactile difference between left, right, and center. The drivers are crap; palm detection is spotty, allowing mouseclicks when they shouldn't be allowed, but also often preventing the mouse from being used at the same time as the keyboard.
It's a joy to mindlessly surf the web, but a pain in the ass to do most other things.
reply