Working at an application remember that it’s meant for people!
Graphic User Interface – does it imply that behind the user-friendly design there is poor functionality? An application should combine convenient interface and rich functionality under one roof.
It never stops amazing me how quickly information technologies develop! Isn’t it shocking that less than 40 years ago people couldn’t even think of any alternative for command line interface. It was only in 1973 when XEROX Park introduced the first graphic user interface to the world. They applied this absolutely revolutionary approach on the basis of their XEROX Alto computer. It looks like a dinosaur today but at that time it was a huge leap forward to user-friendly and effective software. And it gave a start to GUI evolution. But was it really that necessary and why do we still use it now?
There are still many arguments between adherents of different types of user interface: Graphical user interface, Web-based user interface, Command-line user interface and others. But the idea of GUI completely changed the entire process of user interaction with the computer. Offering WIMP (window, icon, menu, pointing device) approach it increases software usability and productivity greatly.
From the other side many software developers tend to divide applications into 2 types: design orientated and functionality-orientated. To some extent this division is true to life, taking into consideration amount of applications that combine gorgeous interface with empty functionality and applications offering uncountable options but poor design. The number of such one-sided software outweighs greatly the number of applications that are somewhere in the golden mean, combining user-friendliness and rich functionality.
Nevertheless it is definitely not enough for an interface to be pleasant to look at and easy to understand. The essence of GUI lies in deep penetration into the problem of user interaction with software. It finds its reflection in well-elaborated structure of GUI-based applications with clearly traced semantic transitions and ultimate ergonomics of the application as a whole. Our long years in software development allowed us to understand perfectly well that when trying to save time or money on GUI elaboration the result is opposite. It happens because poor design alienates the user regardless of the functionality that is hidden behind it. And it is important to come to this conclusion before your application’s functionality is elaborated in order not to lose precious time and efforts changing the whole system for the sake of design.
I believe that if it weren’t for GUI, operating programs and applications could have been much more effort-consuming and difficult for the average user from the ergonomic point of view. And the fact that WIMP-based GUI is now a global standard for software serves as evidence of the correctness of this approach.
Graphic User Interface – does it imply that behind the user-friendly design there is poor functionality? An application should combine convenient interface and rich functionality under one roof.
It never stops amazing me how quickly information technologies develop! Isn’t it shocking that less than 40 years ago people couldn’t even think of any alternative for command line interface. It was only in 1973 when XEROX Park introduced the first graphic user interface to the world. They applied this absolutely revolutionary approach on the basis of their XEROX Alto computer. It looks like a dinosaur today but at that time it was a huge leap forward to user-friendly and effective software. And it gave a start to GUI evolution. But was it really that necessary and why do we still use it now?
There are still many arguments between adherents of different types of user interface: Graphical user interface, Web-based user interface, Command-line user interface and others. But the idea of GUI completely changed the entire process of user interaction with the computer. Offering WIMP (window, icon, menu, pointing device) approach it increases software usability and productivity greatly.
From the other side many software developers tend to divide applications into 2 types: design orientated and functionality-orientated. To some extent this division is true to life, taking into consideration amount of applications that combine gorgeous interface with empty functionality and applications offering uncountable options but poor design. The number of such one-sided software outweighs greatly the number of applications that are somewhere in the golden mean, combining user-friendliness and rich functionality.
Nevertheless it is definitely not enough for an interface to be pleasant to look at and easy to understand. The essence of GUI lies in deep penetration into the problem of user interaction with software. It finds its reflection in well-elaborated structure of GUI-based applications with clearly traced semantic transitions and ultimate ergonomics of the application as a whole. Our long years in software development allowed us to understand perfectly well that when trying to save time or money on GUI elaboration the result is opposite. It happens because poor design alienates the user regardless of the functionality that is hidden behind it. And it is important to come to this conclusion before your application’s functionality is elaborated in order not to lose precious time and efforts changing the whole system for the sake of design.
I believe that if it weren’t for GUI, operating programs and applications could have been much more effort-consuming and difficult for the average user from the ergonomic point of view. And the fact that WIMP-based GUI is now a global standard for software serves as evidence of the correctness of this approach.
.jpg) | Posted by Vladimir Sinkevich, Development Group Manager |
| Bookmark or share: |          |
