Scroll bars are really boring. I've seen a few really inventive new user interfaces for updating these. I believe there are many better ways to spend 10px then with a solid color and static buttons. Here are two examples I've found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PnXY4wjuH8
http://chikuyonok.ru/u/demo/infoscroller/
(credit for this link goes to this question uses HTML5 Canvas )
Do you have any other ideas to add to this list? How can we give a better idea of view-status in the document, without wasting so much real estate? How can we add more functionality to the notorious dead space on the right?
Firstly, one should be very careful about “updating” the scrollbar. The scrollbar is a great success story, a simple, elegant, powerful control that is critical for successful computer use and almost universally understood by users. Trying to improve the scrollbar is like trying to improve the ballpoint pen. It’s stayed the same for so long because there’s really not much more you can do. Being "boring" is not a good reason to improve it. Users don’t use an app or site because it has new and "cool" controls. They use an app or site because it lets them accomplish their tasks. To improve the scrollbar, consider how changes can improve task completion.
Good things the humble scrollbar has:
Capacity to scroll one pane-full.
Capacity to scroll one line (fine tuning).
The capacity to do each of the above repeatedly without moving the mouse (so a user reading some content only has to click occasionally after initially placing the mouse over the right spot).
Allows random access to anywhere in the pane by simple linear drag and drop.
Intuitively shows the relative position in the content (e.g., allowing the user to judge how close s/he is to the end).
Intuitively shows the relative size of content by the size of the slider relative to the track.
Supports intuitive keyboard activation via the cursor keys -good shortcuts, and good for accessibility.
Supports clickamatic (pressing down and holding the mouse button to scroll multiple lines or pane-fulls).
Very smooth real-time feedback on user actions.
All in a remarkable compact and unobtrusive control that doesn’t distract from the content (what the user is really interested in).
You don’t want to mess with any of that. In particular, the pop-up scrollbar you link to is probably a bad idea because it interferes with the capacity to scroll by a pane-full by clicking the track. That is perhaps the most common user action so it deserves the greatest number of pixels (i.e., the track).
On the other hand, building on existing scrollbar capability, like the Infoscroller you link to, is a something worth investigating further. For the original research on this concept, see:
McCrickard DS and Catrambone R (1999)
Beyond the scrollbar: An evolution and
evaluation of alternative navigation
techniques. Georgia Institute of
Technology Technical Report
GIT-GVU-97-19.
Obviously, what you show in the scrollbar track depends on your content. A thumbnail of the content won’t work well for a text table or list. For that, Greg Raiz has suggested indicating the values for the current sort order. If there’s not enough space, maybe tooltips or callouts can appear pointing to key places in the track to drag to. MS Word does something similar with this, showing a tooltip indicating the page and section of the current drag-to point.
Here’re some other ways we could build on the scrollbar:
More Buttons. I’ve seen suggestions to include both up and down buttons at the top and bottom so the user can transition between scrolling down and up without having to slew the entire height of the pane. Or you could have buttons to scroll immediately to the beginning and end of the content, handy for users who don’t know about Ctrl-Home and Ctrl-End, saving them from making a long drag of the slider. MS Word includes buttons to execute the last Find or Goto, among other possibilities.
Split bar. On the subject of MS Word, MS Word and Excel scrollbars include a split control to allow you to divide the window into two panes. That would be handy for a lot of other applications, such as browsers and large lists and tables.
Expert activation. If you don’t want to clutter the scrollbar with more buttons and controls, consider providing expert shortcuts via meta keys. Ctrl-clicking an arrow button could scroll the user to the beginning and end of the content. Ctrl-clicking the track could instantly scroll to the corresponding position in the content, particularly useful if you’ve implemented Infoscroller. Ctrl-clicking the slider could pop open a mini dialog or text box to enter a page number, list item identifier, or Find criteria to jump to.
Left side scrollbar. There is some research suggesting we should usually be putting vertical scrollbar on the left side, rather than the right (see Kellener E, Barnes GM, & Lingard R (2001), Effects of scroll bar orientation and item justification, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting). Having the scrollbar position consistent with the content alignment means less average slew distances for faster scrollbar use. In the same vein, putting the scrollbar on the left in a browser would shorten the distance between the scrollbar and the Back button for faster navigation. However, the advent of the scrollwheel may have made this idea obsolete.
Great question. Please see RockScroll, which is now standard in Visual Studio 2013 Preview: http://www.hanselman.com/blog/IntroducingRockScroll.aspx
RockScroll in turn inspired MetalScroll:
which in turn inspired RockMargin.
Also, Jetbrains Resharper plug-in for Visual Studio puts a vertical affordance to the right of the scrollbar. The information is displayed as little horizontal bars of different colors. These bars indicate a piece of code that can be improved. Clicking on a bar scrolls the code page to bring the code in question into view:
Also, most file comparison software uses fancy scrollbars. See Scooter Software's Beyond Compare 3.0, which puts an "infoscroller"-like affordance separate from the scrollbar. The affordance on the left is draggable like a scrollbar. In addition, to reduce the need for horizontal scrolling, there is a bottom pane which puts the current line from the left pane on top and the current line from the right pane below. Moving the info-scroller allows the user to scroll both documents simultaneously, which makes "merging" changes between two versions of the same document MUCH easier. Please see:
WinMerge has a different, equally scrollable, left-pane that functions like a scrollbar and duplicates the existing scrollbars. http://winmerge.org/about/screenshots/filecmp.png
Finally, Google Chrome integrates search functionality (the "find bar") into the scroll bar.
And Greg Raiz came up with the ABC Scrollbar:
And Overlay Scrollbars which minimize the non-client area:
And a research, gaze-enhanced scrolling techniques.
I like the Google Wave scrollbar- it seems like they've reconciled scroll bars with Fitt's Law.
Related
As Cody Gray mentioned when answering my other question here, Raymond Chen talks about how icon overlays are a poor choice here (note that the article is a year old).
The substantive argument against overlays is that only one can be shown at a time... so if two apply, which one wins? The specious argument is that there can only be 15 - which in my opinion is a design choice by Microsoft, not an argument against their efficacy.
With the changing topology of file:
location
management
ownership
synchronization
replication
?????
I believe Files and folders need the equivalent of presence indicators to instantly identify their status.
What is an alternative to icon overlays that presents the same instant visual queue on the status of a file/folder? Maybe there needs to be a new model for icons?
Edit:
2010-12-14
The more I've thought about this, the more I feel that the idea that there can only be ONE overlay and that there's no way to make overlays work together is ridiculous.
Unless there's a technical reason you cannot have more than one overlay?
Consider (off the top of my head):
You could segment the icon into 4 quadrants (upper left, upper right, etc) - this would allow for 4 overlays per icon. No inter-overlay adaptation required.
You could stack overlays, and ONLY use priority to determine position (z-order anybody?). Allow the user access to User-space priorities, so the USER (you know, the person who the software is supposed to serve?) can choose which overlays matter. Rather than reserving a spot for an overlay, system overlays have the highest priority.
If there is one condition needing an overlay, simply show the one overlay.
If there is more than one condition needing an overlay, layer them all as suggested in the question. Then, the window manager would need to provide an extra UI element indicating that "there's more to know here". Perhaps it only shows up on a mouse hover? Anyway, clicking on that element could show details about the overlay conditions for those who REALLY want to know, but it would be hidden away for the 99.99% of the time when no one cares.
One way would be to add a new Status column in details view, displaying the "presence indicator" in localized plain text.
It would be accessible, wouldn't mess with the file's icon, and would be understandable by all users regardless of their culture or their possible ailments.
Closed. This question is off-topic. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it's on-topic for Stack Overflow.
Closed 12 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm writing an internal-tools webapp; one of the central pages in this tool has a whole bunch of related commands the user can execute by clicking one of a number of buttons on the page, like this:
toolbar http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/1928/commands.png
Ideally, all of the buttons would fit on one line. Ordinarily I'd do this by changing each widget from a button with a (sometimes long) text label to a simple, compact icon - e.g.
button labelled "Save" http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/773/saver.png
could be replaced by a familiar disk icon:
Unfortunately, I don't think I can do this for every button on this particular page. Some of the command buttons just don't have good visual analogs - "VDS List". Or, if I needed to add another button in the future for some other kind of list, I'd need two icons that both communicate "list-ness" and which list. So, I'm still considering this option, but I don't love it.
So it's come time for me to add yet another button to this section (don't you love internal tools?). There's not enough room on that single line to fit the new button. Aside from the icon solution I already mentioned, what would be a good* way to simplify/declutter/reduce or otherwise improve this UI?
*As per Jakob Nielsen's article, I'd like to think that a dropdown menu is not the solution.
Edit: I'm not looking for input about the icon idea. I'm looking for other solutions. Sorry my example disk icon was a small one; it was just an example. I'm showing a bigger one now to hopefully be more clear.
I would add a More Link Like Google does.
See the Top Bar of Google with WeB Images Map More >>
To this more >> drop down you can add logic to add button less frequently used by user or something like that.
If you read Jef (and Aza) Raskin, you'll probably realize that icons are also not a good solution – both were pretty vocal in their dislike for them (with very few notable exceptions). For a start they're even harder to hit than tiny buttons, then their symbols can be confusing, culture-dependent and misleading. We're already good at reading text, parsing and interpreting icons is often slower.
In any case, that button bar looks like it accommodates pretty much anyone and their dog who might be using that product. You might have had some specific scenarios in mind when creating it that should be easy to do and are important. Most likely not all buttons are needed at once for such a task to complete.
Another thing is that maybe not all buttons are even useful at any single state of the application. Can you maybe branch into different sets of buttons, depending on the state. That's only possible however, if each state has clearly defined what actions can be taken. If all buttons are equally pressable regardless of state this won't do anything.
Grouping commands according to related functionality might also be an option. This doesn't have to be done with menu-like idioms, you can also put them into containers with different background color or even color the buttons themselves (just keep in mind color blindness, though). Depending on how related those individual functions are this can be a good way of speeding up interaction. It might requier some training for users to know what the colors refer to but for an in-house tool that's only used by people you know (instead of by arbitrary random ones [which is a problem Microsoft faces quite prominently]) this should pose not much of a problem.
What if you use icons and text?
For the commonly understood commands - use just an icon (like the save)
For the uncommon commands use an Icon + the text.
If you put a border around the button as a whole it should tie the icons / text together nicely and show it's still a button. You could also do some hover effects.
Since you can't do a dropdown menu (or similar techniques like clicking a button to generate a secondary menu). The best I can think of is what Prescott did or showing an area of buttons that are grouped in such a way to make it easy for the user to know which section their button should be in.
I would start by changing some of the longer labels. At a minimum, "Application Loading" could be abbreviated "App Loading." What's another (shorter) way to say "Quick File Transfer"?
You could also group the buttons into tabs (i.e. make it a ribbon). That might work particularly well if different classes of users tend to use different, non-overlapping sets of buttons.
Numerous options:
Group and labeling. Any time you have more than eight commands, you should divide the menu items into semantic groups of about four to help the user scan for the command they want. Labeling the groups also helps the scan and can make the menu more compact. For example, Instead of VDS Ping and VDS List, Have a group labeled “VDS” with “Ping” and “List” menu items. You’ve one less word to fit in (two if you put the label above it’s associated menu items when using a horizontal orientation).
Pulldown menus. Nielsen is correct about avoiding the use of a dropdown menu for making commands. However, he’s clearly in favor of pulldown menus which look and behave like a menubar in a thick client app (Nielsen calls them “command” and “navigation” menus). I think you’ll find that there are several Javascript pulldown menus out there now, unlike back in 2000 when Nielsen wrote his post. You can fit 100s of commands in a menubar.
Sidebar menu. Arraying the menu items vertically and you should be able to fit 20 or more commands and you won’t have to shorten any command names to something user might not understand. If that’s not enough, consider a “menu bank” than combines the benefits of sidebar menu with the capacity of a pulldown menu.
Ribbon. If your commands fit into discrete tasks, where the user tends to stick to one task for a while, you can arrange the buttons on a tab control, with one sheet per task.
Command Overloading. Represent your data objects as selectable entities in your window and change your commands into more general operations, like Drill-down, Create, Copy, Move, Delete, and Link, that can be applied to various different classes of objects, thereby reducing your total number of commands. The user can select one or more data objects then select the desired command to act on them.
Work Area Attributes. Some of your commands may not be commands by settings or attributes. Remove them from the menu and represent them as data objects in the work area of the page (or another page, if they are rarely used) using controls like radio buttons, dropdown lists, and check boxes. This has the added benefit clearly showing the user the current setting as well as providing a means to change it.
Variants. For an internal app, you probably have formal roles and responsibilities that vary by work position. Include the user’s position in your model, and dynamically hide commands (and other controls and pages) that aren't relevant to that position.
What about a combobox and a Confirm button?
Or a simple dropdown menu?
Add a "Tools" or "Actions" menu bar, and stick rightmost 4 commands (or more) into the menu.
Would it be possible to implement a "most used" or "preferred" set of buttons (preferably for the user, but globally if necessary) and button to take you to the rest of the items if you need one of those?
You could group them (like the two 'vds' buttons) behind a single button that, when clicked pops a context menu with the individual icons.
It truly seems like what you're developing is a administration console which happens to present its UI through a web page, rather than something which I'd quantify as a web app. As such, especially given your statement that this is an internal use application, Jakob Nielson's advice regarding <select> tags being poor design need not apply.
For this particular set of assumptions, I think the better option is to imitate a system menu setup using one of the many CSS-based menuing designs possible.
Icons are terrible from a user experience stand point. A picture of a Floppy Disk doesn't un-equivocally mean SAVE. It means something to do with a Floppy Disk. A Floppy really, its 2010, SAVE on a web app means save to the server, how does a Floppy Disk even compute?
Here is an application that has had the same extremely usable interface for 10 years! And hardly any images for buttons, and it is one of the most productive applications in its category.
You know what ICONS stand for I ncomprehesible C ryptic O bfucsated N onsense S ymbol!
Also how do you internationalize an icon?
VS2008 seems to have a new feature that allows one to split a website into the source code and design aspects on the same page. This feature seems great, however it defaults to having the design part on the bottom half of the screen and the code part on the top half.
Unfortunately, my brain doesn't work this way and it ends up being more of a hassle than to just continue switching back and forth when needed like I've done in the past.
Is there a way to swap them so that the design part is on the top and the code part on the bottom? Most other tools in VS are drag and droppable, so I can't see why not, but I'm not finding the setting anywhere. I did a quick google search and found a way to make the split vertical, but thats not what I'm looking for. I'm just looking for the same horizontal split with the design part on top.
Thanks
Here's an alternative approach that may help. If it's a traditional .aspx page (one that has a codebehind), you can open both documents simultaneously. Then right click one in the tab area at the top and select New Horizontal Tab Group. You can manipulate it so that the design window is on top of the code window.
I would be very surprised if this possible, since I have never seen a window configuration that changes the vertical alignment of the Objects and Events drop-down-lists.
I could be wrong, though.
It does seem rather strange - in the xaml designer you can split the screen whichever way you want as there is a button to switch the position of the panes. The options for the html designer only seem to allow a vertical or horizontal split though, there isn't anything in there specifying whether to have code or design at the top, it does seem a little backwards as I imagine most people find it more natural to have the visual designer at the top with the code below.
I've found many answers, here or inside MS' UI guidelines, regarding button positioning, but none about how to position (in which order) buttons when you have three actions to do, New, Edit and Delete.
I have a simple UI, in the upper part I placed a grid listing some data. Beneath, these three buttons. Following what I see around, I have to place them in this order:
New - Edit - Delete
But it seems to me that the delete button is more prevalent and easier to reach and click than the others (it falls on the lower-right corner of my window).
Any suggestion?
I think the order you cite (New - Edit - Delete) is most common because you would logically tab order from left to right when using the keyboard. New would arguably be the most used button (possibly edit depending on the application, but rarely delete) and therefore you wold want the fewest tabs to get to the New button.
Column layouts are always good for these kind of buttons, as one has to move the cursor into the button area, which is horizontally slight and therefore less likely to be accidentally clicked.
Also it provides a perceived division from the main GUI widgets, instead of spanning their length, which tends to create less of a perceived division in the user's mind.
But if you do not wish to change the overall layout, I would say that your current layout is good. Maybe add a delete confirmation box if one is not already present.
Drop-down lists, menus and combo boxes are all very common user interface elements. Users are accustomed to seeing these elements in native applications and sometimes web apps, but there are a few problems with them.
You have to aim the mouse. Some menus collapse when you mouse out, and some have submenus that you have to aim at to expand.
You can't see the options without aiming the mouse first.
These are the main things that trouble me, maybe other people notice other issues as well. I normally don't use drop-down menus at all if I can help it.
The problem is that I sometimes want to present a long list of options in limited space. Issue 2 is a sacrifice I'm willing to make, but I'm wanting to know if anyone has any tricks to make these drop menus easier to use. Maybe someone has invented a new style of list control.
I'm sure that if these types of controls annoy me, then they annoy users of my site more.
Hmm..one more thing which annoys me about the dropdown list is the inability to control their width as it expands with the text (or is their something which I am unaware of ?).
For an alternate, I think about a little popup which initially displays a list of available options in form of Alphabetic index and when the user clicks on an alphabet link, it displays the relevant options to select from. This will reduce the options to select from.
On the same terms, we can use ajax to build the options on the fly as user types in.
You could try something like Mac OS/X has for its taskbar, similar to the selection bar in YouTube. I think the common term is a bubble bar where small images animate larger as the mouse rolls over them, but shrink back down to such a size that all items are visible when the mouse is not over the control.
#Nrj
width='20px' will keep the collapsed drop down at a width of 20px. Problem is, Inernet Explorer shows the expanded item with this width also, while all other browsers i met so far will show you the full menu.