"You don't feel that the "look" part of "look and feel" matters to a UI? You think that "feel" is all that defines a UI?"
- what i'm saying is that the iTunes brushed metal facade really has nothing to do with its user interface. (It's not really made out of metal [WINK!])
"The point is that they are gratuitously different having nothing to do with their function."
"Why? How does making the apps different for the sake of difference improve usability or intuition?"
my point is that things can look different and still have the same function. if the 'look' gets in the way of usability, it's no longer just a 'look'. the 'look' of an application should be totally divorced from usability.
"Since when is iTunes "responsive". It's slow as a dog."
- hell yeah, it's slow. i mean 'responsive' in that the application responds to a user actions and that feedback is given from the app. Arizona sediments respond to the Colorado River by eroding away into a canyon.
#7 is just silly. First of all, brushed metal and shiny scroll bars have nothing to do with user interface. These are surface elements which are totally seperate from functional (ie UI) elements. Secondly, why should all applications look the same to begin with? The rooms in my house don't all look the same. Each of these applications look different because they are different. All doorknobs don't look the same, but I still know how to use them. If an application is intuitive and responsive, like iTunes, Safari, and Mail, it should look different from other applications. It's called style. I suspect #7 was written by a computer with poor visual pattern recognition.
Slashdot Mirror
"You don't feel that the "look" part of "look and feel" matters to a UI? You think that "feel" is all that defines a UI?" - what i'm saying is that the iTunes brushed metal facade really has nothing to do with its user interface. (It's not really made out of metal [WINK!]) "The point is that they are gratuitously different having nothing to do with their function." "Why? How does making the apps different for the sake of difference improve usability or intuition?" my point is that things can look different and still have the same function. if the 'look' gets in the way of usability, it's no longer just a 'look'. the 'look' of an application should be totally divorced from usability. "Since when is iTunes "responsive". It's slow as a dog." - hell yeah, it's slow. i mean 'responsive' in that the application responds to a user actions and that feedback is given from the app. Arizona sediments respond to the Colorado River by eroding away into a canyon.
#7 is just silly. First of all, brushed metal and shiny scroll bars have nothing to do with user interface. These are surface elements which are totally seperate from functional (ie UI) elements. Secondly, why should all applications look the same to begin with? The rooms in my house don't all look the same. Each of these applications look different because they are different. All doorknobs don't look the same, but I still know how to use them. If an application is intuitive and responsive, like iTunes, Safari, and Mail, it should look different from other applications. It's called style. I suspect #7 was written by a computer with poor visual pattern recognition.