When I was a smartass computer nerd in the 80s and 90s, an eternal theme was friends and family sheepishly asking me for tech support help, and me slowly, patiently explaining to them that computers aren't scary, they're actually predictable, they won't explode or erase your data (unless you really make an effort), and they operate by simple (if somewhat arcane) rules. Edit > Cut, then click, then Edit > Paste. Save As. Use tabs, not spaces. Stuff like that. Maybe not easy, but simple, or at least consistent and learnable.

But that's not true anymore.

User interfaces lag. Text lies. Buttons don't click. Buttons don't even look like buttons! Panels pop up and obscure your workspace and you can't move or remove them -- a tiny floating x and a few horizontal lines is all you get. Mobile and web apps lose your draft text, refresh at whim, silently swallow errors, mysteriously move shit around when you're not looking, hide menus, bury options, don't respect or don't remember your chosen settings. Doing the same thing gives different results. The carefully researched PARC principles of human-computer interaction -- feedback, discoverabilty, affordances, consistency, personalization -- all that fundamental Don Norman shit -- have been completely discarded.

My tech support calls now are about me sadly explaining there's nothing I can do. Computers suck now. They run on superstition, not science. It's a real tragedy for humanity and I have no idea how to fix it.

#HCI #UX #UI #okdoomer

@neuralex I think your memory overestimates how reliable and bug-free things were. I was teaching people how to MS Office in the early 2000s, when most of them used the old 9x versions, and so much of my job was working around bugs and people's workaround for bugs.

Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of badness in modern UX (the thing I hate the most is making users stupider through oversimplification, so that people no longer understand what a file is), but it wasn't that great before.

@marmarta Oh yeah, I agree, MS Word's insane toolbars and overlapping mental models were a harbinger of doom. But at least all the nested modal dialogs and sub-sub-sub-settings panels didn't just go missing or blatantly lie about their function.

@neuralex @marmarta and, I mean, for most of the workflow, Office 97ff did work kind of consistently. Click the place you want letters to appear, type on keyboard, save to file, or print on paper. Feedback was immediate.

I just today paid twice, because the "confirm payment" button just does nothing for 10 seconds before forwarding to your "thanks for your top-up" page, and some process designer for Vodafone (small company you might not have heard of) didn't even avoid duplicate transactions.

@neuralex @marmarta I mean, whoever is telling frontend developers that "showing a mockup of the interface that they're waiting for to become interactive" is a good design pattern needs to be sat down and very strictly be explained what a "decoy" is, and how the emotional reaction of people to "bait and switch" is.
@neuralex @marmarta CC: @bernat , because he regularly reminded me that "showing one thing, then replacing that with another, not quite the same thing" is almost universally a negative surprise to the user

@funkylab @marmarta @bernat

yeah, seems “The Principle of Least Surprise” is lost knowledge nowadays 😢

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment

Principle of least astonishment - Wikipedia

@neuralex @funkylab @marmarta @bernat
I think Rust was written to be completely opposite to that principle.

@Nuncio @neuralex @funkylab @marmarta @bernat why do you say that?

(I like Rust but it has a learning curve.)