Edge and interaction density

The existing mainstream mobile phone operating system has some excellent experience, such as Android from the top of the http://www.aliyun.com/zixun/aggregation/35839.html "> Notification Center." Palm's context menu is exhaled from the sensor area in the lower part of the screen. Nokia N9 is more pure, the ethically swipe--from the side sliding switch mobile phone state as the core design concept. It's kinda Summen, from the top down, from the bottom up, from the side to the inside--they're so keen on the edge that when we want to do it again, we find it all around us: why is it the edge? I think of two reasons, the first memory cost, and the second Fitts law. Draw three pictures, try to stay for 5 seconds per chart, remember the location of black spots: In fact, the black spots can be understood as the interface needs to locate the information, randomly placed in the case, 5 seconds of time is probably not a record. The next one, still 5 seconds of time, is also 5 seconds, and the results are different. The reason is that a black spot corresponds to two pieces of information (x,y), but in this picture, one of the information is greatly simplified so that the position of the one or two points can be generally recorded. When we actually use the edge, the situation is simpler, like the next picture, which is 5 seconds.

One obvious conclusion is that marginal memory costs are lower, the truth is also very simple, if the black dots in the screen, each point has two dimensions of information, X,y, and at the edge of the screen, because the edge of only four, it is easy to distinguish, so that the dimension of the information can be almost ignored, so naturally easier to locate.

The second point is the Fitts law, which can be described simply as a time to locate a target, depending on the distance between the target and the current position, and the size of the target (and other factors, but with a smaller interface). The nearer the distance, the shorter the target and the shorter the time. More detailed information can be found here

On the surface, there is no direct relationship between the Fitts law and the edge, but think about what we call "move to edge" and "move from edge" to the actual target point is not the edge itself, but the "edge." It can be imagined that if we need to locate a point on the edge, more or less will not count, in fact, it is difficult, but if you just move out of the edge of the count, it will obviously be much easier. Applied to the Fitts law, the location of the target point is actually the edge of some pixels and the entire area beyond the edge, the target point is large enough, and the Fitts law because of the increase in the denominator to make the interface efficiency. The following figure.

In addition there are some of the design I have done as a case, such as the following unlock the interface, the above for the concept of the manuscript, below is the formal development of our products before the improvement of the manuscript, this design can be in the market now on the Tencent customized mobile phone can be. The small print in the right figure is "drag an icon to the edge of the screen to unlock." This design makes full use of the screen four edges, out can be explained by the Fitts law of efficiency, while some of the advantages include: can be blind to unlock (unlock in the center of the screen, the sensor area is also larger, easy to locate), And then you don't have to see that the screen can unlock or even get into the app you want (four common screens around the screen), which means that the process of taking it out of your pocket is done from unlocking to selecting applications. Of course, no matter what design is not perfect, such as the design is also subject to a number of challenges, such as: "Why there are four entrances, one is not very good, mobile end design to a page to complete a function, not so complex." I do not agree with this, but also involves another topic about the density of interaction. Although the design of mobile end is simple and clear, it cannot be generalized. 100 features are not possible to schedule 100 pages to complete, and the interaction density needs to be related to user familiarity. Draw the following icon, but just feel it, without argument: When Nokia was working, a designer talked about their findings: The time a user spends on a mobile screen every day, about 60%-70% or more on the home screen, This conclusion seems to lead directly to the nokiaN97 when we saw the bustling head of the main page, regardless of the design of the good or bad, the data is more objective (3 years ago data). For the user is very familiar with the interface, although we do not need to be like the main page of the N97 function, but in the function, content layout will increase the density of some is acceptable, so that users can effectively improve operational efficiency. Also explains the problem of four entrances to the above design. Motorola launched a new mobile phone late last year interface and our previous design is very similar, not to say Moto plagiarism, should be just a coincidence, because Tencent also often have to face the accusations of plagiarism, maybe we are all Chinese, accustomed to the word, but the design is not so much plagiarism can speak. Good ideas can collide. In general this is not a bad design. With respect to edge and interaction density, there are many applications in desktop software, mac,win7 system has many excellent experiences. Recently we in the QQ2012 concept manuscript also has the full embodiment, the short time is inconvenient to put the design manuscript to come up, after all it can bring some good experience, worth practicing.

Source: http://www.gaoge.me/?p=150