[theamk]

Because they are terrible if you actually try to use them, instead of just seeing them in the movies? In particular,

(1) Human eyes are drawn to moving objects, so unimportant things should not move. That rotating globe with points, or blinking "everything is OK", or jumping arrows would get very old very fast.

(2) Interface should feel fast - not like this LCARS thing where each click takes a few seconds of highly annoying flashing before anything changes. Sure, it makes sense in the movie so that viewers know what the character did, but in real life people know where they clicked.

(3) (Professional) interfaces should be informative. If one needs to click ten times to browse the list of twenty people, and each click takes multiple seconds, that's a lot of wasted time. That said, if something is designed for novice/occasional users, lower information density is OK and in fact, that's what we see in all many modern mobile apps.

[krschacht]

(1) and (2) are good points. Particularly 2 because movies may intentionally add steps / slow things down so that a viewer can follow along but this would be at odds to daily use.

However, I still think there's something to be said for movies attempting to build UIs that have a strong aesthetic and elicit an emotional response, whereas production apps feel so flat and boring, in comparison.

I still wonder why we aren't seeing people try to push the envelope stylistically to "wow" users.