Examples of good UI

Just about anything done by Kai Kruse (Bryce 3D, Photo Soap, the various Photoshop Plugins and so on). Microsoft should have hired him to do their Vista interface. Don't even get me started on their Office 2007 interface (and sadly the new Solidworks one).

Of course by "Great UI" there's pretty and then there's useful and the rare combination that is both. Personally I hate reaching for a toolbar or an icon. I like hot keys, RMB, and so forth. I don't mind going to a panel to address properties such as the Solidworks left side panal or max's right side panel but other than that I want to stay center screen. For that reason I really like max's RMB Quad and Maya's dashboard though my perfect interface would drastically alter that dashboard.

Speaking as someone with 14+ years in DCC (Max, Maya, Truespace) the way Solidworks currently handles colors/textures/materials is truly horrid (2007).

Modo has some great gizmos/manipulators.

Having live feedback on fillets, chamfers, and so forth would be great. (Preview is not the same as live) It's not that big of a deal for basic design/engineering but for ID/aesthetics it's very useful.

SolidWorks 2007 isn't that bad either.

John Layne

I am pleasantly surprised to see you ask for peoples opinions about this Mark - good stuff ;o) I would like to think that means there is some possibility for a revisit in the near future and that you are not just asking for your own interest. I am perhaps a little more surprised not to see more replies already given the controversy over the 08 UI changes.. This would seem like a nice opportunity to express preferences rather than straight rejection of the 'regrettable'. I am not sure I can really nominate something outstanding but I might talk a little about things I find frustrating and the reasons I think that some approaches work better than others.. Its actually quite hard to write a thoughtful reply to this in a short time..I might break it up into parts..keep tuned in..

There is something I think to be said for not having programmers prepare the UI unless they are one man bands or very small teams with a unique vision of what they want to achieve as in the case of MOI. The reason for this is that they are too close to the code to be able to see it objectively or at least how the user sees or experiences it. An example of this from my own experience is a makeover I did for the Blender-Indigo python script a while ago. Really I only know enough python to hack around but the thing was the coding progress of both Indigo and the script were leaving people who weren't expert technical users or coders themselves behind. All the functions were being incorporated as they emerged but it really didnt make sense or the layout was a bit mangled/ad hoc and the tooltips were not providing enough clues for the uniniatiated to pick up on..also the documentation was/is lagging the development and at times quickly superceded- a situation perhaps similar to SW. Anyway to cut the story short it needed someone to come along and restate/rearrange things if you like with a foot in either camp - having a reasonable understanding what was being done technically but also being a learner and therefore able to comprehend what was not explained well or in the correct order, place etc. In doing this it is ought to be possible to go back to the programmer therefore and explain that what they are doing in the analysis isnt quite the way it needs to work...which is most likely what they dont appreciate hearing. In the past we have had some things incorporated into SW that fit into this scenario. Yes they work but you wonder why it was done like that if only they had...or why is that here? or why cant I do that? Stuff seems unfinished or half baked and it never seems to be reexamined or completed and you suspect there is little comprehension that people dont actually work like that or it is almost there but not quite. Which brings me on to point 2..

the iPhone...dont have one myself ,not available here yet and too pricey for me ...also I admit I am a person who hates cellular phones ;o) but ok why is this good? putting aside the Apple golden halo and the battery issue... answer: because it works the way you do. to my mind this is not the same as being intuitive - something I have already made comments about as being an unuseful pursuit in itself.. Someone definitely spent some time asking fundamental questions of the nature 'what do I want to do' and then they made the device conform as best as possible to that using the technology or said 'hey wouldnt it be cool if' and developed and refined to achieve that it as they went. Also they didnt rush. They took time to get it right. The big word QUALITY. In SW ID terms this would be like a jump forward to subdivision surfaces so that people have a dynamic entity to work with rather than construct a surface here loft there cut there...borrow a sketch there reopen it redo it.... In some ways although it is progressive SW fails to make the big jumps ahead and gives us noble clunk like 'Deform' Part of this of course is you guys feel compelled to have something showy every 9 months and you dont understand the real market or give your customers what they want..you are pink Zune makers ;o)

ok MOI as an example... Why do this sit well with people? answer: because it sets out to work the way you do..its like Rhino stripped of the Autocad command baggage If you look at the UI it seems natural and uncluttered.. The tools are immediately to hand and it is apparent what they are for and they are a reasonable size so as not to be cryptic or need to pause over tooltips. The icons dont set out to win art competitions or conform to a fashionable OS style they are functional and directly representative of what it does. It has a sketchbook simplicity to it. It stays with same symbols you see in the working window so your mind doesnt do a jump just interpreting the icon. This is what I have said before about SW icons you guys try to do too much with them in the belief the appearance is important to make a sale. This product is for technical people. I dont know about you but I tend to go into another mental zone when I am creating stuff. I can imagine whole projects in my minds eye and then sorta translate/ project that into symbols or I am thinking in terms of maths or chemistry or.... really the colour of the interface is of little actual importance because I dont notice it. What you do want is to spontaneously recognise the symbol and use it or its related function. Imagine Einstein trying to solve relativity equations that are done in multiple colours with perspective and shading...does it help? the language is symbols not impressionist paintings I think

ah anyway Im about done this evening - might come back with more thoughts tomorrow

I've struggled to think of a program that was both powerful and easy to use. The only one that sprang to mind was when ICQ (the instant messaging program) first appeared back in the 90's. It offered what was for the time, amazing functionality that was blindingly obvious to use. It's since been copied by MSN and Yahoo Messenger.

As for CAD programs, I think SWX is easy to learn but obstructive to use - particularly for assemblies. I-DEAS was very easy to learn the basics, but kept many of its more advanced secrets hidden well away from the casual observer. However, once learned, I feel it was easy to use.

I don't knwo whether SolidWorks Corp does this sort of thing (I hope so), but SDRC (who used to be the authors of I-DEAS) carried out a major exercise a few years ago where they intensively studied how many mouse clicks and hand movements were required to complete a range of typical CAD design tasks. They then tweaked the way numerous commands worked to great effect - no drastic interface changes, just a subtle reworking.

John H

User Interfaces are the one thing which is the bane of bad products. It is easy to cite the bad ones. In hardware they come with 50+keys like remote controls and typical cell phones, with all the issues.

Once I get used to a particular product, I forget about some of the UI features, as my mind goes into auto-pilot, but I offer the following.

iPhone is not typical: I've had mine for exactly 2 months and it is the only cell phone I've owned on which I never read a manual. It is also the only phone where everything worked (I didn't try all sub options). The bi-directional synch is easy and works 100% and DOESN'T REQUIRE A USER INTERFACE.

Again a Negative before a positive: This may seem initially like a trite or meaningless comparison, but here goes:

MS Word (2004 on my Mac Book Pro mainly though I have it on my Dell): #1, as much as I use it, I am NOT a professional writer, nor have I or would I take training to learn every feature, as it wouldn't benefit me. It is not very easy to find what I want in MS Word when I'm not really sure of where the option is located. Help file is not so helpful many times. I have tried to use the Word's Outline function to do outlines for many reasons, but it is a nightmare for me as it is not simple, yet should be.

Engineers & designers probably used outlines more than many other people. What to do? Go Simple!

I bought Inspiration

Granted that a very complex program can not be as simple as Inspiration, but I do wonder if a user can have things to be hidden which can be easily "found" or "tipped open" or "brought to the front" or "flipped out" when needed.

I use PowerCADD

So for both Inspiration & PowerCADD, I find their small toolbars along the edges very usable and understandable and efficient. For consistently high output, I rely on command keys so I don't have to hit icons or menus, as in SolidWorks.

iPhone's interface has something to teach us in a couple ways that were obvious to me:

1. Icons are large: Most prior phones had stupid icons probably 1/8" square. Apple only uses things that small for signal strength and Bluetooth icons, which are not accessed by a click
2. Black background works in the icon selection arena to enhance visibility
3. Color in the Icons: Very useful for quick recognition.

1. Master "Back" button: Getting Home is easy.

For SolidWorks is there a Hidden Interface Element that has been totally ignored?: in the case of the iPhone, Bluetooth is one thing that makes the iPhone great, as answering calls means I don't interact with the iPhone to do a major task.

I think a BlueTooth headset keyed into SolidWorks might be a useful, option. Warnings about memory, errors, file name collision, broken Refs, Mates, or who knows could be delivered via audio as appropriate and at the user's wish. I would rather get a BT headset audio warning in some cases than a dialog box.

Is there also the ability then to do audio annotations to my SolidWorks files, such that I can say, "God I have to clean up this feature's draft and blend radii before it goes into production, but it's OK for the first design review." Text annotations for things like this take way too long, and at times are intrusive, considering I don't usually want to leave design comments there on screen and have to then turn off the visibility to continue work cleanly.

Or: Maybe SolidWorks can have its own internal Outliner for keeping user commentary. There are a lot of design decisions and options that get kept on scraps of paper.

I have heard rumors that the next Laptops from Apple are going to have a more interactive "trackpad" possibly like the iPhone. I believe it is inevitable that the trackpad, like a Wacom tablet, may eventually become more of a part of the User Interface in a number of ways.

I wouldn't be surprised to see custom keyboards for desktops start to appear with these advanced trackpads. If I could get one for use with SolidWorks, I'ld probably try it.

Bo

A prime example of an Ideal User Interface by my viewpoint, would be one where I could go to an outline of the principals of Consistent User Interface Methods & Options. I for one didn't know I could take the red dot on an "on edge" line with a broken reference and reattach it. I just missed that until someone showed me.

A second example of a good User Interface would be a Manual/Help File with boolean search terms that allows us to get 3-5 hits rather than

Some will say, "Let the VARs do it". My VAR didn't have time for me when I bought SolidWorks. I plunked down $5k, and said when can I take my introductory class, and the answer was "we are booked up for about 6 weeks." to which I replied, my first project is due out in less than a month. Well, I did my project successfully by going through the tutorial/easy start booklet that came with SWks 2000.

Good built-in manuals, help, examples, UI standards and such could make it a lot easier for users. We users can't spend time learning everything as we just don't use it all, but when we suddenly need to do it to finish by 5pm (or 10pm), we should be able to figure it out without scheduling a training session weeks downstream.

Resolution independence in the menu sizing might be helpful for people using the wrong screen (1900 pixel laptop screens), or poorer vision than 20-20, such that the user can scale up or down his toolbar & menu sizes. Apple has taken a lead on this issue.

I do not know about setting contrast in the toolbars, but sometimes I have wondered if it would help reduce the feeling of clutter. I use "Menu Shade on my Mac Book Pro" because I don't need that bright line of items highlighted all the time. I got it from VersionTracker.com.

I find that when doing more complex assemblies with 10-20 files open at once that picking the right file, with the shortened file names of the hidden files that are open to be useless. If I could hit a button and see a preview image of all open files like you see in pdf or photo browsers, I could INSTANTLY pick the file I know I need by look, not by a foreshortened file name.

Bo

I hear World or Warcraft talked about for a good interface. Looking over my little brother's shoulder, I can see that it is very customizeable, and it honestly reminds me of how I have SW set up. The main thing that I can see it has over SW is that major UI elements can be floated or docked. Apart from the task pane, SW is completely lacking this common UI functionality. Text in a transparent window in WoW is still readable over the game graphics, which SW cannot reliably do with the flyount FMT. Perhaps the game graphics have a palette that is easy for text to contrast with.

WoW also sometimes incroporates popular UI elements that were created by users as plug-ins. This seems like a good idea. I can think of a few candidates for custom property management, mate hotkeys, etc.

Other games with good UI features: Battlefield 2 and 2142 have a feature called "commo rose" which seems like the next step past the context menu enhencements in 2008. Some of the LucasArts games that I saw had a similar thing. I think Full Throttle was the first to implement this for LucasArts, as the primary feature of the UI.

I wonder how useful some examples will be for CAD UI. iPhone is designed to be used with fingers, not keyboard and mouse. MoI is designed for tablets. Both of these examples have to simplify the UI because of lack of hardware to interface with the user. It seems to me that a unique problem of CAD UI is the enormous number object types and operations and combinations of those that have to be dealt with. On top of that, CAD has selection requirements that nothing else does (BTW, SW selection filters need a way to select on object properties, as well as object type. I recently wanted to select all the balloons where the custom property referenced in the lower half had a certain value. It can't be done). Good examples of non-CAD UI may be limited to serving as illustrations of the fact that a clear, efficient UI for the task at hand is a good thing.

It might be important to ask people why the cited examples are a good UI. What is important in each case? Is the iPhone discoverable? Is Photoshop consistent so that uncommon tools still make sense? Do games have a UI that transports the user into the game world?

To answer my own question: The commo rose in Battlefield is a very fast and efficient way to select which operation to perform on a selected object. Floating, transparent UI elements in WoW are a great way to present information and controls to the user while still allowing enough graphics to come though to give the user visual context for the graphical content that is the actual focus of attention. SW is already doing some of this well, but could do much more.

Some of the best UI out there has simply discarded the MS playbook. MS does a workable job of handling files and office tasks (possibly excepting the ribbon of Office 2007). For most other tasks MS interface guidelines seem useless.

Possibly OT rant: View manipulation (and possibly other manipulation) needs to be exposed to the game controller interfaces of Windows, instead of relying on 3DConnexion's plug-ins and expensive hardware. Windows is perfectly able to handle 6 DoF input devices, and I believe that they would get a lot cheaper if plug-ins didn't have to be developed. Right now, 3DConnexion has an effective monopoly on 3D controllers, and it just doesn' need to be that way. If controllers could use standard Windows interfaces, more and better controllers could be developed because of the decreased cost of software development. There have been 6 DoF game controllers that were far less expensive than Spaceballs (Spaceballs? the monopoly!), and I'm sure they were precise and reliable enough for CAD work. Seriously, just hire Z-XYS or DiMonte Group (or both) to design one to ship with SW. I wonder if it would cost less than implementing DFM Express. I'm sure it would be used more. Maybe even put the dongle in it. Make it so cool that it becomes an icon for SW. Take that Inventor! Take that SolidEdge! Many users are missing out because of the cost of these things, and they do bring a real benefit to the UI.

Just have to say that basic manipulation (rotate, pan, zoom) in SW is excellent. For example, I don't know any other package that can rotate models with single button mouse action.

I would like to comment on RSI problems that I got from intensively using Solidworks which has a lot to do with inefficiencies in the userinterface.

Solidworks needs much more scrolling and precise mousemovents than most other Cad systems and it is getting worse almost every release with trees and propertymangagers getting bigger showing more and more (often useless) information that needs to be scrolled away in so many basic operations. The precise mouse movements and scrolling caused me RSI problems. I know there are many types of RSI problems caused by several types of repetitive work and it is different for anybody but a typical "mouse hand" injury is often caused by the excessive use of the mouse.

One of the things that causes the precise mousemovements are the lack of selection adjustments like aperture or pickbox like in Autocad and other CAD systems which really eases the selection and avoids the precise mousemovements and that really is a shame for RSI problems in Solidworks.

I found solutions in making as much as possible shortcuts on the left hand with alt, shift, ctrl and a combination of these. Further I have reprogrammed some often used functions to avoid the endless mousemovements to and from the tree and property managers. The idea is to have as much as possible small popups invoked by shortkeys on the left hand that allow the right hand mouse input almost without moving the mouse.

Further, Solidworks is really inefficient when using a couple of windows open at the same time because the size of the propertymanagers and therefore the commands you can see are restricted to the size of the window and number of open windows. You have to scroll or windows maximize all the time only to see your command options. This is really a pain, liturally.

The property manager user interface of Solidworks is restricted to the size of your window and number of open windows and this is a real Solidworks problem, no other CAD software I know has this problem and limitation. It keeps you scrolling on end or windows minimize/maximize, it is a serious userinterface problem. Solidworks also needs so much area for the for the property manager so that effective cad area is seriously restricted.

This propertymanager userinterface is easy to learn but hard to drive as it needs a lot of additional scrolling or windows maximize commands only to see your commands when working with multiple windows, something Windows was desigined for. It is really dissappointing to see the first Windows solidmodeller chooses this userinterface that causes a lot of unnecessairy mouse interaction when working with multiple windows.

Agreed and actually what type of task they are doing in SW when they say they favour hotkeys for example My guess is someone using hotkeys is actually engaged in a different type of work and mental process to someone who wants radial menus or perhaps a spaceball type device with 15 buttons or perhaps it is just a personal preference? Personally I dont feel I need a spaceball the mouse works fine but... If you have a job that requires you to pump out say structural steel or sheetmetal you probably dont want tools presented in the same fashion as someone playing with shapes or trying to imagine how to integrate conceptual art. Perhaps this would alleviatate complaints from some people who arent at all into ID stuff for example and balk at realview 'improvements'..so.. not only can you nominate say to have an icon set set for your most likely purpose but the UI changes somewhat to mirror how people want to/feel happiest functioning. Although say the iPhone UI may be a great soln for that purpose transposing the same thing into CAD would be much less useful - about as much use as MS Office in SW ;o)

ok more random thoughts... it occurs to me this is not the first time opinion has been given by the community about the UI My question for Mark is: What happened to all the previous suggestions made that SW borked the changes they made in 08? How did they arrive at the solution they did? Perhaps if we understand what the thinking was behind this we can point out where it went off course with people... I think people have made requests for dual monitor support for a few years and that hasn't surfaced.. Richard has made comment on scrolling and clicking for a while his awareness heightened by his RSI experience..was that considered at all? are we just not giving the feedback in a useful form? Come to think of it I am sure I tried to get some enthusiasm going to discuss radial menus or radical solutions a while ago - did anyone at SW appraise that? Perhaps people can submit sketches or cut and paste mockups or videos to SW if there is a real interest inside SW. Would you guys pay a modest amount for some real thinking to be done and presented by people out here? a small prize for the best 5 ideas or something?.. Would you allow early criticism/hacks of your next concepts? What worries me is that you guys will again be open to some input but then go away and do something the marketing dept want or make a wrong call based on your own 'better judgement'. I admit people arent going to give as much time to this as your own full time staff and hopefully you guys have experts in their feild to articulate and analayse things better than we can but somehow we have to get this grounded in the real world well before someone puts it in the release pipeline

ok one more contribution...

anyway enough of my ramblings ;o) HTH mark

Interface issues are hard, otherwise we would be sitting in nirvana now. The current UI in 2006 is not what I would consider bad. I am productive with it. Assigning keys to functions and tools makes most things quick. I suspect there are good reasons based on the use of human habits & memory why screen based "choices" for CAD programs have become what they are.

When we drive, we can actually get into an aware but hypnotic sort of state, because of the sameness of driving the same route everyday. That sometimes causes problems, but it happens to a lot of people, if not everyone. I think it may happen to me in some forms of constructions in SolidWorks, though I can't prove it. If it happens as I think, the interface and my repetitive tasks are well linked to allow these simple things to proceed without as much effort or thought in just "cruising" through routine items.

Given that when we are doing sketches, we are not needing menus or toolbars much, is it possible or desirable to minimize the tool bars to give more room to sketch? Then when a key is hit or cursor heads toward a screen edge the toolbar can expand to usable width as opposed to hogging real estate ALL THE TIME.

Likewise when we finish with a sketch, there are a half dozen or so most common extrude or cut tools, so why shouldn't those be available at the cursor in some well done method?

And then after writing the above, I am not convinced that I would save much time. I can see you have to prototype and use an idea long enough to be able to understand what could work and if so really how well.

Bo

Bo wrote in news:1188482077.006924.131630 @z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com:

I get that all the time. When I'm in the groove with a design, I rarely think at all about the tools. Everything just flows. However, I used to do this with AutoCAD and MDT, mostly using the CLI. So, I think we can conclude that an experienced user can get in the zone with any reasonably consistent interface, regardless of perceived efficiency. (Perceived efficiency: I sometimes miss the command line.)

I like this idea of menus that automatically expand. Some of the new pop- ups in 2008 are behaving something like this. This would be a great way to maximize graphics area.

One of the utilities I use is called MouseImp. It enhances scrolling behavior, but what important to this discussion is that it can automatically roll a window into "window shade mode" when the pointer is not over the window. So, to use the window, move the pointer over the window and it expands. This used to work on floating toolbaars too. (something broke this several releases ago.) I used to stack rolled up toolbars, then mouse over them until the correct toolbar was unrolled. In concept, this wasn't much different from the command manager, except you activated the desired toolbar by rolling over it. It was a quick way to access command buttons, and very compact on screen. And it didn't waste horizontal space like the command manager.

I just tried this again for the first time in years, and it's working again! Time to go crush my toolbars...

Hardly a killing, a quick look at FX CAD sales on eBay seem to be near

Tom

J

John,

Not as bad as it sounds since eBay is only one outlet for them. They seem to make a good product and hopefully in return a good living. I just wanted to point out that they are not making the killing that Jon thinks they are.

Plus there are costs involved with producing the tutorials, marketing, packaging, selling, overhead as well as gross sales are not the same as net.

Tom