|
|
|
|
|
by jdiff
957 days ago
|
|
This is exactly the problem. These two things are not at odds. Good design is functional. Good design makes information easy to find and digest. Visual soup is hard to organize and make sense of. Form is a component of function. A knife with another blade instead of a handle can do less cutting, not more. A knife with a contoured handle is easier to wield than one with a flat block handle. These concepts translate well into UI. |
|
> Visual soup is hard to organize and make sense of.
Initially yes but once you know where things are, having everything be visually distinct can sidestep a lot of unnecessary GUI features (search boxes, configurable views, toolbars, etc.) to overcome the impenetrable and dishonest sameness that comes with "good design". If there's a way to avoid writing more code to maintain, they're going to find it. Why obscure the reality of the underlying logic and data when it just gets in the way of progress towards more functionality?
In a production setting desktop environments are rare anyway and that's where applications are at their most complex. That should be proof enough that visual design isn't functional. You want functional and accessible? That's a simple 1KB config file on a server somewhere that you edit from a terminal instead of an endless sea of GUI menus and a lifetime of wrist and eye issues. The ultimate "contoured handle" is a copy of vim! If you don't see the equivalence then you don't understand how much of an unnecessary and tortured metaphor the desktop really is. It's a concession, not a requirement.