Slashdot Mirror
Must We Click To Interact?
Rockgod writes, "Here is an interesting experiment (warning: heavy Flash!!) that urges you not to click anywhere in the site yet wants you to navigate through it. It's an exploration of the clicking habit of computer users and aims to help understand why it is so hard not to click." The site records the mouse movements of each visitor and offers you a sample of them to replay. Doing so is a little unnerving, like peering into people's minds.
The cursor isn't always "pointed at something" when it is over the client window. Clicking is often unnecessary, but not always. Anything that reverses itself at once when the cursor leaves the area is fine, but if actions which require another action to reverse the effect are triggered by a mouse-over, users feel that they need to be careful where they point their mouse. They shouldn't have to be careful because mouse movement is not exclusive to one application.
Moving the mouse around to navigate was fine, but after a while I felt a bit like I was chewing without swallowing. There's some kind of satisfaction with the click. Maybe it's just habit, but after swooping around without clickin' I felt frustrated and annoyed. Like the UI was doing everything it could to keep me from that button. If normal mouse-using is me going "i want.... THAT." I felt like I was going "I want... I want... I want... I want..." I must have satisfaction, dammit.
They say one of a baby's first non-verbal forms communication is pointing. Clicking must be somewhere just after that.
The site reminds me too much of the gesture-controlled radio in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: you have to sit perfectly still while listening or you'll change the channel.
``Must We Click To Interact?''
No. I can use the shell, read and write mail and Usenet, surf the web, chat with others, manage windows, etc., all without using the mouse. I rarely even find the mouse convenient; it sits there a long movement away from where my hands are (on the keyboard), and it requires adjusting hand movement to the position of a pointer in a different plane.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
I'm wondering if even they miss the point of a click. I tried out the site and the problem is unexpected things triggering when I move the pointer past them. The click is a confirmation of a selection, so the pointer selects an option (from a massive grid on our screen) but the click confirms it. Otherwise, as happens with this site, you end up going to wrong places because you have no way of confirming a selection.
but is Flash really required for this? Couldn't it be done another way?
No, Flash is not really required. It could all have been done with Javascript and images, plus possibly image maps.
I imagine that clicking is easier to manage than careful mouse manipulation for people with disabilities.
I'm not disabled, but I'm getting on a bit, (age > 60) and I find clicking a bit troublesome. (Double-clicking is really troublesome, I can't imagine why anyone ever thought that double-clicking was a good idea.) Remember that the sensitivity of mouse movement is adjustable in most GUIs, so pointer manipulation is unlikely to be a problem for anyone.
Using a mouse interface without clicking is akin to using a command line interface without pressing enter. The mouse click serves a very important purpose - to ensure that selections and actions are performed on the correct item. This greatly reduces errors, increases the speed of interaction, and reduces the real estate required by the interface.
Creative ways of using a mouse have been tried repeatedly (such as the gesture selection system in Black and White and Darwinia), but the conclusion is invariably that such systems are just pains in the ass once the novelty wears off.
This is an Apple product feasibility study, isn't it? Is the next Mac going to have a zero-button mouse?
So is this the difference between a clickless site where you just point, and a pointless site where you just click?
$nice = $webHosting + $domainNames + $sslCerts