The most painful part of user experience Design: complexity (complexity)

When it comes to http://www.aliyun.com/zixun/aggregation/8643.html "> User experience Design, it will certainly refer to the antithesis of simplicity and complexity (simplicity and complexity), Then everyone will assume that simplicity is good, simplicity is beauty. You don't even have to be an experience designer knows that no UX designer would say: "Our goal is to make the work very, very complex." "Generally speaking simply means eliminating unnecessary distractions and allowing users to achieve their goals directly--but that doesn't mean that complexity has to be eliminated, sounds contradictory, doesn't it?" There are times when complexity is not necessarily a bad thing, and in the following article we will give some examples to help us find the balance between simplicity and complexity.

by Francisco Inchauste/july 6th 2010

Source: uxmag/Translator, editor: Wayne Tai@damndigital

Simple is really good?

It seems that everyone thinks so. In fact, our daily behavior is contrary to this perception. Imagine a cloudless sky and a sunset over a cloud of sun-studded clouds, which obviously people prefer. In some cultures, complex products sell better than simple designs: in South Korea, products like refrigerators are designed to look very complicated, because complex designs are thought to represent higher prices and higher prices represent more money for owners. [1]

When we compare two items, we compare their respective functions (feature). More functionality at the same price represents more "cost effective", even when reducing functionality is to provide greater ease of operation. So simplicity may not be a good idea for a manufacturer. For example: Siemens has designed a washing machine that can analyze the amount of clothing in the washing machine, the type of material and the degree of dirt--the fully automatic washing machine requires manual setting for only two parts, but Siemens has designed the control Panel to be more complex than other non automatic washing machines. In other words, even if the producers find the way to simplify the consumer also do not buy, people still like hands-on equipment. [1]

The performance of

complexity

In the design world, people always like to look simple and clean, the first push case is Google. Google is essentially a search engine, and a set of search engine UI in essence does not need what functions and content, put aside the simple surface of the extremely complex back-end operations, Google tells us that simplicity sometimes does not mean minimalism. Compared to Google as a search engine, Yahoo! and MSN, which appear to be more complex, are actually two network indexers (webdirectories), which can make it more clear that different UI designs are designed for different types of tools. [2]

In physical products, the relationship between simplicity and complexity appears to be more fanciful. We can see the function of skis and guitars at a glance, but it takes years to learn to use them skillfully. These lack of control is the reason they go up, and these links ultimately require users to adapt and learn, in fact, the whole product is more complex. [3]

Daring Fireball's John Gruber said, "If your UI stacks up and looks like an airplane cockpit, your design must be a failure." [4] We always assume that a seemingly complex interface is bound to be difficult to experience, but just as all dashboards in the cockpit are essential, and if all the features of a complex interface are used by users, then there is nothing wrong with the design.

Information Display

This is a big problem if you are rendering information on the UI. Edward Tufte proposed two solutions: [5]

The same space adjacent to the display (adjacent in spaces)-that is, the same screen to display all content. The complexity depends on how much information and functionality-for example, the cockpit takes all the dashboard and all the important data out, so that the driver can retrieve the information very directly and make a quick decision. The adjacent display provides a more intuitive way of doing things, and accelerates interaction behavior.

Along the timeline display (stacked in time)--contrary to the former, this method divides the functions into different pages, which reduces the number of user errors and facilitates the hiding of unnecessary information in different operations. More pages also represent more user experience/brand experience. The display along the timeline does not require the user to make a quick decision.

simple sometimes equals more complex

Only the amount of data determines the complexity of the application. In general, when we make a UI, the principle is "less is good". But "less" means deleting unnecessary elements. In many cases, it is necessary to retain a higher density of information. "For example, the traditional small-screen phone" for beautiful "each screen shows only a few pieces of information, users have to dig their own things they want, so lost in the endless menu, in this case, the same screen display to design the interface is the best. [6]

There is also a fairly balanced example of interface design iphone and Windows 7 Series Phone. Luke Wroblewski wrote an article (a comparison of the content denotes inclusive the phones) to tell us how different devices are displayed at any given time. It can be found that WP7 has chosen to reduce the amount of information per UI to achieve the same screen display of all content to reduce the operation steps (up to one to two steps), and the iphone has chosen to improve the density of the interface to make the operation more rapid and intuitive. Overall, the goal of UI design should always be to help and guide users to their goals, not just to look good (most people think simplicity is good-looking). The simple UI design style is designed to reduce the need for a variety of unnecessary crushing processes rather than outright cutting down information and content. [7]

Real Complex

Complex interface design, such as dashboards, is required for complex user needs. All the dashboard in the world is full of data, because that's what it's made for--to provide information. Simulation cockpit is the same, in which the trainees will be the future pilots, and the aircraft needs and complicated operation, the driver needs to face a large number of automatic operation of the instrument and its abstract data, so the simplicity here is not appropriate.

live in a complex world

As an interactive designer my subconscious tells me simplicity is beauty. But after a period of practice I have found that sometimes complex content and design need to be preserved. These irreducible complexities and high density information presentation are inherent to the design goals and their work steps. Designers need to find a balance between beauty and function. That's what good UI design is all about. Simplicity is not an end, but simplicity lies in how the designer integrates all the complexities effectively, and a good user experience depends on the designer identifying the material that makes sense to the user and then presenting it to the user in the best form. Donald Norman said: "You can not simplify the complexity of their own, and how to integrate the complexity of effective integration, this is the work of the designer." "[8]

Reference: simlicity is highly overrated–don normangoogle Says ' more are more ' –luke wroblewskithe Psychology of Everyday Thingshow are bad? –daring fireballlearning from ' bad ' ui–37signalsiphone Interface design–edward tufteinformation denotes on the Windows Phone 7 Series–luke wroblewskiwhy is Notoginseng signals so arrogant? –don normanimage Creditsairplane image:http://www.check-6.com/gallery/heavies/ B-2-spirit-cockpit-by-chad-slattery.phpblender image:http://www.flickr.com/photos/35006614@n05/3250917143/sizes /l/iphone vs. Windows Phone image:http://www.lukew.com/ff/entry.asp?265