PS: > I get that you don't like it. It's your right. But it's aesthetics, and > trying to claim otherwise is false; there's nothing about it that should > confuse users. Being a slave to aesthetics can harm usability (his > oft-cited example about doors with no handles, or with ambiguous > handles, comes to mind) [1], but nowhere does he argue for doing away > with all aesthetics. >
> > [1] This page has a summary that references the anecdote I'm thinking > of:http://www.situatedgaming.com/CISHCIExam/norman.html Of course I know the well-known thinkings of latches on doors. This is a classic thinking of usability. And yes, he doesn't argue to ignore all aesthetics. But: 1. Who says, scrolling backgrounds are aesthetic? Is there a representative survey? Does anyone think Apple's iPhone isn't good looking, because it has no scrolling backgrounds (and never will have)? 2. Norman don't want to remove all aesthetics, but if this hinders the usability he says the opposite. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-discuss?hl=en.
