Ask Slashdot: Is the Rise of Skeuomorphic User Interfaces a Problem? 311
An anonymous reader writes "The evolution of user interface design in software is a long one, and has historically tracked the capabilities of computers of the time. Early computers used batch processing which, is mostly unheard of today, and consequently had minimal human interaction. The late 60s saw the introduction of command line interfaces, which remain popular to this day, mostly with technical users. Arguably, what propelled computer use to what it is today is the introduction of the ubiquitous graphical user interface. Although graphical interfaces have evolved, in principle they have remained largely unchanged. The resurgence of Apple saw the rise of skeuomorphic graphical user interfaces, which are now starting to appear on Linux. Are skeuomorphic designs making technology accessible to the masses, or is it simply a case of an unwillingness to innovate and move forward?"
Re:Shit Editors (Score:5, Informative)
From the linked Wikipedia article:
"Portion of iCal, calendaring software from Apple Inc.. Skeumorphs in iCal include leather appearance, stitching and remnants of torn pages."
Digital skeuomorphs:
Many music and audio computer programs employ a plugin architecture, and some of the plugins have a skeuomorphic interface to emulate expensive, fragile or obsolete instruments and audio processors. Functional input controls like knobs, buttons, switches and sliders are all careful duplicates of the ones on the original physical device being emulated. Even elements of the original that serve no function, like handles, screws and ventilation holes are graphically reproduced.
The arguments in favor of skeuomorphic design are that it makes it easier for those familiar with the original device to use the digital emulation, and that it is graphically appealing.
The arguments against skeuomorphic design are that skeuomorphic interface elements use metaphors that are more difficult to operate and take up more screen space than standard interface elements; that this breaks operating system interface design standards; that skeuomorphic interface elements rarely incorporate numeric input or feedback for accurately setting a value; and that many users may have no experience with the original device being emulated.
Skeuomorphism is differentiated from path dependence in technology, where functional behavior is maintained when the reasons for its design no longer exist.
One of the earliest examples of a skeuomorphic interface was IBM Real Things.
Re:skeuwhatzit? (Score:3, Informative)
Check out these examples from Apple: http://medialoot.com/blog/skeuomorphic-design/
It's the correct term to use, not burped out of a thesaurus.
Hint for future "Ask Slashdot" articles (Score:4, Informative)
Avoid unfamiliar terms, even if you link to a page explaining them. As you can see, 90% of the discussion here is about how an unusual word was used where GUI would have served the same purpose, which not only takes away a lot of space from a discussion about the actual question, but also made me skip pretty much all of it because I didn't come here to discuss the pros and cons of showing off ones word stock but whether GUIs are troubling. But now, instead, I wrote this note, which adds about as much to the actual discussion, but might serve you as a reminder to avoid things that take away attention from the actual question you're asking.
In architecture... (Score:4, Informative)
it's called 'facade' versus 'functionality.'
The classic counterargument is that Courbusier advocated frill-less (and thus cheaper) "functional" towers, but himself chose to live in a replication of a medieval Italian villa.
+5 karma to those of you who get the 'Blade Runner' reference.
Re:Shit Editors (Score:5, Informative)
Links in the RSS feed are not shown as links. So that if you are reading via google reader. et. al. you don't see it. It wasn't till I came to the site to see comments that it was available.
dimes