Apple love to preach “the UI gets out of the way of your content” with each new redesign, but how true is that in practice? Let’s compare the total height of the Safari UI with a toolbar, favourites bar and tab bar visible, across the three latest Mac OS design languages – Yosemite, Big Sur and now Tahoe. I’ve added a red line for emphasis.
It sure looks to me like the UI is eating more into my content with each redesign.
Apple isn’t alone in that. More and more sites and programs are become space inefficient.
Not all of us have dual 36" ultra high rez monitors for you to waste the space with more and more area round every element. I know you’re proud of your UI design skillz, but it’s getting really ducking annoying.
I had to send in a screenshot of one Google page for editing contacts. 90% of the screen was fixed sized menus and the contacts photo. The last 10% was a tiny scrollbars box for editing a very long list of options. The devs responded basically “meh”, though a few months later it adjusted to be a bit better. Do they ever test anything that’s not on a huge screen before rolling to prod?
I feel this way all the time. I used to have to tell my (often less experienced) coworkers “that’s unusable on a device, which is how 75% of our traffic will consume it.”
It was usually because it looked nice on a huge monitor, and in an emulator.
I really want Apple to just stop redesigning things
They should bring back Mountain Lion or whatever. I heard it was peak
Leopard and Snow Leopard had vastly better virtual desktops than Lion onward. You actually had a grid of them and could navigate up/down/left/right with shortcuts; afterwards you only got a linear list of desktops.
Gridded desktops were great. I had a 3x3 grid, of which five cells were used. My main desktop was “centered”. Thunderbird was right. My IRC and IM clients were left. iTunes was down. I don’t remember what was up; it’s been a while.
Leopard was peak Mac OS X.
Even if people had dual 36" monitors or whatever, most sites or programs seem to focus more and more on making things fit into as small a horizontal space as possible. Even if you have a vertical mo it or you’d have huge swatches of white space along the edges of the screen.
For horizontal space, it tends to be really hard to design for larger widths and still maintain focus on the main content in a readable way. For example, you should avoid super wide blocks of text as it’s really easy to get lost as you read. This is why you often see a max width with large gutters for wide displays, especially on pages with a singular focus, such as an article.
Do people really have that much trouble focusing as they read? Honestly I have trouble focusing when you fit maybe a dozen words per line, with giant swatches of nothing surrounding it. I have to change any wiki article I read to the wide format or it’s virtually unreadable to me.
Very much so. The longer the line, the more your eyes move and the easier it is to lose track of where you are. It can be worse when you move to the next line, as you lose your frame of reference from the previous line on the other side of the screen.
@brandon @Zorque This has been researched about hundred times and for most readers in the Roman alphabet lines between 55 and 70 characters - a space is a character too - are easiest to read. Hence scientific articles in Latex and similar later text mark up languages use two columns on a A4 paper.
So why dont sites use multiple columns?
@Zorque Habit, I guess. If I create a website, I can chose from about 70 templates with Everweb, no of them having a two column lay out.
So I guess it’s difficult to get this right in HTML but I’m by no means an expert on this topic.
I can say i have experienced that occasionally, but it had less to do with being hard to read visually and more to do with just not caring about what I’m reading. Which seems less of a “We need to make this easier to read” and more a “We need to trick people into thinking they’re reading something meaningful” problem.
Is it something to do with shortsightedness? Maybe an ADHD thing that somehow doesn’t affect me for some reason? Maybe just I’m super good at basic visual spatial orientation?
Or is it just that people read with such small text that it’s hard to differentiate between lines? I honestly can’t fathom an inability to read a line in any other circumstances.
That is funny! I’ve opted-in to change the default & tried the wide format on Wikipedia a few times and each time it has reinforced what I perceived to be the obvious developer decision based on (ostensibly) the “obvious“ user preference… :)
That you’re terrible at reading?