Intentionally bad UI
-
It's a thread:
https://twitter.com/volodarik/status/1657755496852475906From things that remind me of you fuckers:
Apparently from
/r/badUIbattles
-
I experienced a password entry form similar to the randomizing-keys-per-press one.
-
-
Check out https://tonsky.me/ which I coincidentally (re)learned about earlier today.
-
@Zecc I spent inordinate amount of time - as in more than 0 Âľs - mouse-overing over that guy's mug
That being said...
One of us! One of us!
-
@Applied-Mediocrity Absolutely. He's behind https://grumpy.website
-
@Zecc said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Applied-Mediocrity Absolutely. He's behind https://grumpy.website
As a rule of thumb, toggles should not start any action. Especially calling someone. Use buttons for that
Rule of thumb? More like: get this wrong and Iâll break your thumb. With a hammer.
-
@topspin if everyone made UI that made sense, a reasonable chunk of this site wouldn't exist.
-
@Zecc I looked at the site, and I read his thing about 4K monitors, which was violently dishonest. He shows all these pictures of text, which really does look awful, but since they are enlarged by about 10:1 in both horizontal and vertical, you'd kind of expect it. He goes on about how horrible they look, but never shows them at 1:1 size so we can judge the "true" appearance for ourselves. (Mostly, I don't care. If the text is clear enough at "normal" scale to be easily readable, that's all I care about. Precise and accurate text rendering is not part of my job, and I have much better things to worry about than how inexact the rendering of text is on my screens.)
-
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Intentionally bad UI:
which was violently dishonest
I like this post.
What is the expected output of
100+20%? Keep in mind regional settings where.might not be the decimal seperator!
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Intentionally bad UI:
What is the expected output of
100+20%?Presumably he expected 120. But the framing does suggest he doesnât see 100.2 as a completely cromulent interpretation.
⌠I was surprised to see the Qalculate! actually does do this:
That program always surprises, and in a pleasant way. Decibels are beyond it, though (expected answer is 1000):
Regarding the fonts/monitors, there was actually one reasonable example that I have seen myself:
Even without blowing up the pixels, the unevenness was noticeable. And you can hardly expect a 1:1 image showing pixels smaller than your monitor. Most of it was unconvincing, though. Perhaps the real lesson is âdonât try to space three things evenly,â you can see the top of the a being squashed as well but it hardly matters.
-
@kazitor said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Intentionally bad UI:
What is the expected output of
100+20%?Presumably he expected 120. But the framing does suggest he doesnât see 100.2 as a completely cromulent interpretation.
Yeah my non-advanced math system wetware would not interpret it as "number, add to prior's percent of next number". Is that an RPN thing?
-
@Tsaukpaetra
Itâs not that uncommon for +20% to mean â20% moreâ or â10% to mean â10% lessâ (i.e. Ă0.9).I personally canât wait for games to list all stat modifiers as decibels. +2.43 dB damage! Woah!
-
I like this one. Who uses their remote like this? And if you're so disabled, why are you using the remote anyways?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Intentionally bad UI:
I like this one. Who uses their remote like this? And if you're so disabled, why are you using the remote anyways?
You're holding it wrong
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Intentionally bad UI:
I like this post.
What is the expected output of
100+20%? Keep in mind regional settings where.might not be the decimal seperator!When I try that, I get:
⌠which is what I would expect to see. Not sure what the decimals separator has to do with it, though (FWIW, my systemâs is set to the correct one,
,).
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Intentionally bad UI:
I like this one. Who uses their remote like this?
I usually have the remote lying on the sofa next to me, aimed more or less at the TV, and sometimes press a button without taking the remote into my hand, like if I just want to turn the volume up or down one notch or something. I can see this being a problem with a remote with a rounded back like that one.
-
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Intentionally bad UI:
I like this one. Who uses their remote like this?
I usually have the remote lying on the sofa next to me, aimed more or less at the TV, and sometimes press a button without taking the remote into my hand, like if I just want to turn the volume up or down one notch or something. I can see this being a problem with a remote with a rounded back like that one.
But you can still put your hand on the remote to steady it while you do that.
-
@Watson Of course. But thereâs such a thing as exaggerating for effect, like that clip did.
-
@kazitor said in Intentionally bad UI:
That program always surprises, and in a pleasant way. Decibels are beyond it, though (expected answer is 1000):
And that's OK as the interpretation of the dB depends on the unit of the things you're comparing. 100W+10dB=1000W while 100V+10dB=316V.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Intentionally bad UI:
I like this one. Who uses their remote like this? And if you're so disabled, why are you using the remote anyways?
I agree with him on that. It's placing style over function. I see no reason you shouldn't be able to use the remote like that. Maybe you have food on all of your fingers except one.
-
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
When I try that, I get:
⌠which is what I would expect to see.
That's definitely incorrect. That's the kind of thing Microsoft or Google would do, "We know better than you as to what you really meant."
-
@jinpa The usage of percent keys in calculators goes way back before Microsoft & Google. This is pretty typical usage on basic calculators for decades, where if you want to add 6% sales tax to a number, you just type +6% and it does what a typical merchant would want, even though it's very weird to a mathematician/engineer when you try to actually write down the spec of what that percent key does.
How does the calculator percent key work? - The Old New Thing
The same way it does on a cheap calculator.
-
@pcooper I remember having a basic calculator where the sequence for adding 6% to 27.99 ⏠would have been more like
27.99 x 6 % +possibly with an=after the+
-
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
Not sure what the decimals separator has to do with it, though
It will affect the output if it has fractions in it.
-
@jinpa said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
When I try that, I get:
⌠which is what I would expect to see.
That's definitely incorrect. That's the kind of thing Microsoft or Google would do, "We know better than you as to what you really meant."
I daresay that the vast majority of (non mathematically schooled) people is likely to think of
+20%as âmultiply by 1.20â (though they likely canât articulate it like that) which is what the calculator in my screenshot does â but the one in the other post doesnât. Which is odd, because that one looks to be macOSâs Spotlight function just like the one I posted.@Steve_The_Cynic said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
Not sure what the decimals separator has to do with it, though
It will affect the output if it has fractions in it.
Well, yes :) What I meant is that there is no decimals separator in the calculation as entered, so I donât see how it would affect anything there specifically.
-
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Intentionally bad UI:
@pcooper I remember having a basic calculator where the sequence for adding 6% to 27.99 ⏠would have been more like
27.99 x 6 % +possibly with an=after the+I just tried that with a very, very basic calculator from the 1980s, and pressing 100 + 20 % results in
120.However, with my trusty Casio Ćx-82B, the % key (actually INV+=) seems have some functions I canât fathom:
- 100 Ă 20 % gives
20â so, it treats the 20 as0.20by pressing the % key. - 100 + 20 % gives
600â WTF? 100 + 21 % gives576.19048, 100 + 19 % gives626.31579. Something predictable is going on there, but I have no clue what. - 100 â 20 % gives
400, 100 â 21 % gives376.19048, 100 â 19 % gives426.31579â this is clearly related to using + instead of â, but again, no idea what or how. Iâm guessing itâs my lack of mathematical background that causes me to be puzzled by these outcomes.
- 100 Ă 20 % gives
-
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
causes me to be puzzled by these outcomes
Operator overloading was a mistake!
-
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Intentionally bad UI:
@pcooper I remember having a basic calculator where the sequence for adding 6% to 27.99 ⏠would have been more like
27.99 x 6 % +possibly with an=after the+I just tried that with a very, very basic calculator from the 1980s, and pressing 100 + 20 % results in
120.However, with my trusty Casio Ćx-82B, the % key (actually INV+=) seems have some functions I canât fathom:
- 100 Ă 20 % gives
20â so, it treats the 20 as0.20by pressing the % key. - 100 + 20 % gives
600â WTF? 100 + 21 % gives576.19048, 100 + 19 % gives626.31579. Something predictable is going on there, but I have no clue what. - 100 â 20 % gives
400, 100 â 21 % gives376.19048, 100 â 19 % gives426.31579â this is clearly related to using + instead of â, but again, no idea what or how. Iâm guessing itâs my lack of mathematical background that causes me to be puzzled by these outcomes.
Hmm...
- Sees
100 + 20/100 - ...realizes
5 * 20 = 100 - multiplies both by 5
500/100 + 100/100 = 600. - Profit!
No idea why they would do that, but it seems to work for the other numbers.
- 100 Ă 20 % gives
-
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
Something predictable is going on there, but I have no clue what.
If you add 100 to 20, the result is 600% of 20.
If you add 100 to 21 the result is 576.etc% of 21.
-
@loopback0 said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
Something predictable is going on there, but I have no clue what.
If you add 100 to 20, the result is 600% of 20.
If you add 100 to 21 the result is 576.etc% of 21.What the absolute fuck?!
-
@topspin said in Intentionally bad UI:
@loopback0 said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
Something predictable is going on there, but I have no clue what.
If you add 100 to 20, the result is 600% of 20.
If you add 100 to 21 the result is 576.etc% of 21.What the absolute fuck?!
And here I was thinking I was the
retardmentally incompetent...
-
@topspin said in Intentionally bad UI:
@loopback0 said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
Something predictable is going on there, but I have no clue what.
If you add 100 to 20, the result is 600% of 20.
If you add 100 to 21 the result is 576.etc% of 21.What the absolute fuck?!
That's why they come with a manual.If you want to increase 100 by 20% it's 100x20%+ as noted further upthread.
-
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
I daresay that the vast majority of (non mathematically schooled) people is likely to think of +20% as âmultiply by 1.20â (though they likely canât articulate it like that)
At the risk of painting myself as mathematically challenged: seriously, what other interpretation is there? 120%?
-
@Zecc I think the other interpretation is to consider the % sign as meaning "/100" (which is the actual original meaning, "percent" is literally "per hundred"), in which case
100+20%becomes100+20/100i.e. 100.2.But while there may be come arcane sub-field of science where % is used in this way, I think anyone who can't read "100+20%" as "100+20% of 100" should instead reply
E_INVALIDrather than any numerical value. Because otherwise there is a dimensionality issue: % is dimension-less so adding it to a quantity (100) that has a dimension is a syntax error (you simply can't add meters and grams).
-
@remi In my mind percentages are always relative. So I'd accept 120 or E_INVALID.
100.2 seems extremely surprising to me, but I see the thought process behind it now you've mentioned it, and I've stopped being surprised a long time ago other people think differently from me.
-
@loopback0 said in Intentionally bad UI:
That's why they come with a manual.I may have misplaced that in the 35 years since I bought the calculator âŚ
-
@Zecc said in Intentionally bad UI:
I've stopped being surprised a long time ago other people think
I'm always surprised when other people think. It happens so rarely.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Intentionally bad UI:
@Zecc said in Intentionally bad UI:
I've stopped being surprised a long time ago other people think
I'm always surprised when other people think. It happens so rarely.
I don't think that's appropriate
Filed under: self-
:tro:
-
@HardwareGeek âThinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the reason why so few engage in it.â I believe Henry Ford said this.
-
@remi said in Intentionally bad UI:
in which case
100+20%becomes100+20/100i.e. 100.2.Wouldn't that be 20 centime?
-
(and yes, for this one the character design is clearly related to the name)
-
@Gurth said in Intentionally bad UI:
@loopback0 said in Intentionally bad UI:
That's why they come with a manual.I may have misplaced that in the 35 years since I bought the calculator âŚ
Fortunately in those 35 years they invented some sort of network of very fancy calculators.
-
@loopback0 What? Where? How do I sign up for that?!
-
@Gurth it's easy. You just need one of these:
-
@loopback0 Ooh! All I need now is find a CD-ROM drive to hook up to my computer âŚ
-
@remi said in Intentionally bad UI:
see AstĂŠrix in, uh, some other thread
Start here: https://what.thedailywtf.com/post/2083250
-
@Zecc said in Intentionally bad UI:
other people think differently from me.
Apologies, but I am improving all the time! Somewhat...
-
@Zecc said in Intentionally bad UI:
Start here: https://what.thedailywtf.com/post/2083250
Or skip directly to: https://what.thedailywtf.com/post/2084477
-
Morons at Spotify has been making their UI worse consistently over the years. Few months ago they published large overhaul that made it barely usable. But why stop there? Lot's of things to take inspiriation from. Like the 'CSS is awesome' mug:
I swear, those brainless cunts intentionally try to push users away.
