Timeline for Does user care about the details while loading?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
30 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2017 at 12:39 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Dec 23, 2014 at 17:27 | history | edited | tom91136 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added some thoughts about life
|
| Aug 18, 2014 at 16:36 | comment | added | Phil Tune | I'm reminded of the loading messages that popup when loading the Sims. (Oh, I just looked up and see @NeeL had the same idea, hah!) Though those messages were made up and don't correlate to actual loading operations, they do give the impression that the program is doing something. What's important is that the message is short but meaningful. Users usually aren't interested in the details. But some users may be interested in knowing why they must wait (even if it's <3000ms). | |
| Aug 14, 2014 at 22:24 | comment | added | NeeL | A good exemple of fun loading messages while you patient is the loading screen of the game Sims, it keeps you interested until you know them all | |
| Aug 10, 2014 at 19:49 | comment | added | Andrew Gies | I don't know about anyone else, but when I see the same "Loading" text on the screen for a half an hour, I imagine something along the lines of a turtle running a marathon: no efficiency. Now, when I see loading bars that have detailed text flickering across the screen so fast I can just barely read it, I think: "This program is powerful. This computer is powerful. Look at how much crap it's doing!". In reality, there probably isn't much difference in the actual speed of the program, and I know that. But the second one still feels faster, and stronger compared to the other one. My two cents... | |
| Aug 10, 2014 at 19:15 | comment | added | Ben Voigt | @and31415: I think that's specific to the information inside the progress bar, and not an accompanying label (good to have a log file as well, of course, but logging does occasionally fail too -- hiding information and trusting a user to go find it in a log file is a bad user experience, transitioning to terrible if the log file wasn't actually written due to problems with invalid path, permissions, disk full, interrupted network, or file already exclusively locked) | |
| Aug 10, 2014 at 17:35 | comment | added | and31415 | @BenVoigt The article I linked earlier also reads: "Because the feedback provided by progress bars isn't necessarily accurate and is fleeting, progress bars aren't a good mechanism for providing information for technical support. Consequently, if the operation can fail (as with a setup program), don't provide additional progress information that is only useful to technical support. Instead, provide an alternative mechanism such as a log file to record technical support information." Don't get me wrong: I like details myself (as long as they're actually useful), but they do have a point. | |
| Aug 10, 2014 at 14:42 | comment | added | CoffeDeveloper | showing to much info could be a potential security risk? | |
| Aug 8, 2014 at 22:43 | comment | added | user52840 | @Simon What is a 'bulk file rename'? | |
| Aug 8, 2014 at 20:23 | comment | added | Ben Voigt | @and31415: Users can always do something with it. Perhaps only "Report the message that was on screen when it hung", but that's significantly better than nothing. (If reporting it is the only thing that can be done, make that even easier by including a unique status code) | |
| Aug 8, 2014 at 11:59 | comment | added | Simon | @MilesRout Pointless. Opinion based only. Try doing a bulk file rename in OSX. Or System -> Preferences -> Network connections in most *nix distros. By your logic, they are all designed for stupid people. BTW, I just a changed a file permission. 2 dialogs, 2 clicks. | |
| Aug 8, 2014 at 8:15 | comment | added | user541686 | By the way, I'm fairly sure that both the description and the progress bar for launching InstallShield (then one you displayed a screenshot of) are pure BS, for no purpose other than to amuse the user. | |
| Aug 8, 2014 at 7:58 | comment | added | Simon | @MilesRout Interesting proof point on opinion vs fact. I find Windows easier to use than the common alternatives which I find enormously frustrating when doing some of the heavy lifting I do, especially OSX. | |
| Aug 8, 2014 at 5:28 | comment | added | user52840 | @and31415 It's of no great surprise to me that the Windows design principles can be basically summed up as 'assume the user is an idiot'. It makes it an incredibly frustrating system to use if you're not an idiot. | |
| Aug 7, 2014 at 21:27 | vote | accept | tom91136 | ||
| Aug 7, 2014 at 19:22 | comment | added | Nicholas Pappas | Sounds like a great A-B Test situation. | |
| Aug 7, 2014 at 17:52 | answer | added | Panzercrisis | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 7, 2014 at 15:04 | comment | added | and31415 | A quote from the Windows UX Design Principles: "Don't provide unnecessary details. Generally users don't care about the details of the operation being performed. For example, users of a setup program don't care about the specific file being copied or that system components are being registered because they have no expectations about these details. Typically, a well-labeled progress bar alone provides sufficient information, so provide additional progress information only if users can do something with it." | |
| Aug 6, 2014 at 20:40 | answer | added | Hagen von Eitzen | timeline score: 3 | |
| Aug 6, 2014 at 20:38 | answer | added | stonk-overflow | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 5, 2014 at 13:43 | comment | added | user11153 | "The time it takes to get the content ready(download/decode/buffer) is not short, but not long enough to make the user navigate away. I would say around between 8~15 seconds." - on YOUR device. | |
| Aug 5, 2014 at 12:12 | answer | added | smalltown2k | timeline score: 8 | |
| Aug 5, 2014 at 11:34 | answer | added | William | timeline score: 9 | |
| Aug 5, 2014 at 11:30 | answer | added | Adnan Khan | timeline score: 34 | |
| Aug 5, 2014 at 10:01 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackUX/status/496596854403244032 | ||
| Aug 5, 2014 at 9:35 | answer | added | Nzall | timeline score: 14 | |
| Aug 5, 2014 at 8:46 | answer | added | Marvin | timeline score: 72 | |
| Aug 5, 2014 at 8:45 | answer | added | Benny Skogberg | timeline score: 34 | |
| Aug 5, 2014 at 8:40 | review | First posts | |||
| Aug 5, 2014 at 9:43 | |||||
| Aug 5, 2014 at 8:35 | history | asked | tom91136 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |