Home > Articles

Bad UI of the Week: Read This (OK/Cancel)

David Chisnall

Toggle Open Article Table of ContentsArticle Contents

Close Table of ContentsArticle Contents

  1. Bad UI 10: Read This (OK/Cancel)
Close Table of Contents
  • PrintPrint
  • Share ThisShare This
  • DiscussDiscuss
Close WindowDavid Chisnall

David Chisnall

Learn more…

The State of Open Source 3D
Feb 9, 2010
What Is Mac OS X?
Feb 5, 2010
Snow Leopard: The Underhyped APIs
Jan 29, 2010
Foundation: The Objective-C Standard Library
Jan 26, 2010
Cocoa Tips: Exposing System Services
Jan 22, 2010
Cocoa Tips: Don't Reimplement Standard Functionality
Jan 15, 2010
Localizing Cocoa
Jan 8, 2010
How Core Animation Changed Cocoa Drawing
Jan 4, 2010
Using Distributed Objects in Cocoa
Jan 1, 2010
Inside Modern X11 Programming
Sep 18, 2009
Making JavaScript Fast, Part 2
Sep 15, 2009
Security in Your Pocket: OpenBSD on ARM
Sep 11, 2009
Making JavaScript Fast, Part 1
Sep 8, 2009
The Failure of the GPL
Aug 31, 2009
How Not To Optimize
Aug 21, 2009
A Half-Way Step to Apple’s Source Code: An Interview with David Chisnall
Jun 5, 2009
Advanced Flow Control for Objective-C
Jun 5, 2009
Erica Sadun on the iPhone SDK, OS X, and the Computing Landscape
Jun 5, 2009
From NeXTSTEP to Cocoa: Erik Buck on the Development of Cocoa and Objective-C
Jun 5, 2009
Fun with the Objective-C Runtime
Jun 5, 2009
Marcus Zarra and Matt Long on Core Animation
Jun 5, 2009
Steve Kochan on the Evolution of Objective-C
Jun 5, 2009
The Technology NeXT Gave the World
Jun 5, 2009
Where the Web and the Desktop Meet: An Interview with Lee Barney
Jun 5, 2009
Pandora: An Open Console
Jun 2, 2009
The Future of Wireless Networking
May 15, 2009
GNU or Linux?
May 11, 2009
Debugging C-Family Languages
Mar 27, 2009
How Small Is Your PC? The Rise of Netbooks and Other Small Form-Factor PCs
Mar 23, 2009
David Chisnall's CPU Feature Wishlist
Mar 13, 2009
The Dynamic Languages Renaissance
Jan 30, 2009
Robert Seacord on the CERT C Secure Coding Standard
Dec 15, 2008
Objective-C for C++ Programmers, Part 3
Nov 21, 2008
Objective-C for C++ Programmers, Part 2
Nov 14, 2008
Objective-C for C++ Programmers, Part 1
Nov 7, 2008
Writing Insecure C, Part 3
Oct 24, 2008
Writing Insecure C, Part 2
Oct 17, 2008
Writing Insecure C, Part 1
Oct 10, 2008
iRex iLiad e-Reader: Linux's Answer to the Kindle?
Aug 29, 2008
How It Works: Filesystems
Jun 13, 2008
How the LLVM Compiler Infrastructure Works
May 23, 2008
How It Works: Virtual Memory
May 21, 2008
What Is C For?
May 16, 2008
The Future of eBooks
Apr 25, 2008
Imagining an Open Network
Apr 18, 2008
Understanding How Xen Approaches Device Drivers
Mar 21, 2008
Examining the Legendary HURD Kernel
Mar 14, 2008
Competition Among Open Source Compilers
Feb 1, 2008
Inside Your OS: What is a Process Scheduler, and How Does it Work?
Jan 25, 2008
Bad UI of the Week: Read This (OK/Cancel)
Jan 18, 2008
The End of the Desktop Era
Jan 11, 2008
The What and Why of Open IM
Dec 28, 2007
A Look at the Modern X Server
Dec 21, 2007
The Future of Digital Media
Dec 14, 2007
The Future of Identity
Dec 7, 2007
Bad UI of the Week: Ask Forgiveness, Not Permission
Nov 21, 2007
Copyright Versus Free Software
Nov 16, 2007
Is Computer Science Dying?
Nov 9, 2007
A Brief History of Programming, Part 2
Nov 2, 2007
A Brief History of Programming, Part 1
Oct 26, 2007
The 700MHz Question: Will the Wireless Spectrum Auction Lead to Innovation or More of the Same?
Sep 28, 2007
Bad UI of the Week: The Menu Bar
Aug 24, 2007
The Dark Corners of x86
Aug 17, 2007
Bad UI of the Week: The Cross-Platform User Interface
Aug 17, 2007
Bad UI of the Week: The Mythical "is Like" Operator
Aug 10, 2007
Bad UI of the Week: Don't Make Me Tell You Twice...
Aug 3, 2007
Bad UI of the Week: Kettles and Washing Machines
Jul 27, 2007
The BBC iPlayer Controversy Explained
Jul 20, 2007
Bad UI of the Week: The Mitten Mouse
Jul 20, 2007
Bad User Interface of the Week: File It Under “Bad”
Jul 13, 2007
Bad User Interface of the Week: The DVD
Jul 6, 2007
A Roundup of Free Operating Systems
Jun 22, 2007
DragonFly BSD: UNIX for Clusters?
Jun 15, 2007
CPU Wars, Part 3: Put Your Left ARM In
May 18, 2007
CPU Wars, Part 2: POWER to the People
May 11, 2007
CPU Wars, Part 1: When the Chips Are Down
May 4, 2007
ZFS Uncovered
Apr 6, 2007
Vector Programming with GCC
Mar 30, 2007
Free Software Versus Open Source Software
Mar 16, 2007
What Programming Languages Should You Know?
Mar 9, 2007
Standardizing UNIX
Feb 2, 2007
Prolog: Logic Programming for Rapid Development
Jan 26, 2007
POSIX Parallel Programming, Part 3: Threads
Jan 19, 2007
POSIX Parallel Programming, Part 2: Message Passing
Jan 12, 2007
POSIX Parallel Programming, Part 1
Jan 5, 2007
The Nokia 770 Revisited
Dec 29, 2006
The Open Source Desktop Myth
Dec 22, 2006
Separating Style and Content: LaTeX and Typesetting
Dec 1, 2006
GNUstep: A Free Software alternative to OpenStep
Nov 10, 2006
Behind the Scenes of Objective-C 2.0
Nov 3, 2006
The Future of CPUs: What's After Multi-Core?
Oct 27, 2006
What Makes a Good Programming Language?
Oct 20, 2006
Emulation: Role-Playing for Computers
Oct 13, 2006
NetBSD: Not Just for Toasters
Oct 6, 2006
POSIX Asynchronous I/O
Sep 22, 2006
Breaking Down GPL Version 3
Aug 18, 2006
The Role of Binary Drivers in a Free OS
Aug 4, 2006
Security Is a UI Problem
Jul 28, 2006
Debunking the Myth of High-level Languages
Jul 14, 2006
A Taste of Erlang, a Dynamic, Asynchronous Message-Passing Language
Jun 30, 2006
Alternatives to LAMP
Jun 2, 2006
BSD Packaging Systems
May 26, 2006
DRM: Digital Rights or Digital Restrictions?
May 4, 2006
Introducing OpenBSD 3.9
Apr 28, 2006
The Need for Virtualization and Xen
Mar 31, 2006
Making Effective Software TCO Calculations
Mar 24, 2006
10 Things I Hate About U(NIX) Revisited: Readers Speak
Mar 17, 2006
Comparing Open Source Licenses: GPL vs. BSDL
Feb 3, 2006
BSD: The Other Free UNIX Family
Jan 20, 2006
Measuring the Effectiveness of Application Security Policies
Jan 13, 2006
The Cost of Free Software
Dec 9, 2005
Nokia 770 Internet Tablet Week-long Test Drive
Nov 18, 2005
10 Things I Hate About (U)NIX
Nov 4, 2005
The Lure of Open Source Software: Why Consider It for Your Business?
Oct 14, 2005
Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/29/10
By on January 29, 2010 No Comments

Don't ignore old versions of OS X.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/28/10
By on January 28, 2010 No Comments

Exceptions should be exceptional.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/27/10
By on January 27, 2010 No Comments

Explore the runtime system.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/26/10
By on January 26, 2010 No Comments

Copy design patterns from Cocoa.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/25/10
By on January 25, 2010 No Comments

Profile with Instruments.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/22/10
By on January 22, 2010 No Comments

Expose system services.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/21/10
By on January 21, 2010 No Comments

Always read the release notes for new OS X versions.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/20/10
By on January 20, 2010 No Comments

Broadcast events with notifications.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/19/10
By on January 19, 2010 No Comments

Port your code with GNUstep.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/18/10
By on January 18, 2010 No Comments

Use CoreAnimation for caching.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/15/10
By on January 15, 2010 No Comments

Don't recreate standard features.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/14/10
By on January 14, 2010 No Comments

Don't forget NSCell.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/13/10
By on January 13, 20102 Comments

Plan for code reuse.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/12/10
By on January 12, 2010 No Comments

Remember the C in Objective-C.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/11/10
By on January 11, 2010 No Comments

Separate interfaces and implementations.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/8/10
By on January 8, 2010 No Comments

Think about localisation early.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/7/10
By on January 7, 2010 No Comments

Read the Human Interface Guidelines.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/6/10
By on January 6, 2010 No Comments

Don't optimise yet.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/5/10
By on January 5, 2010 No Comments

Put controllers in nib files.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/4/10
By on January 4, 2010 No Comments

Don't write code.

Cocoa Tip of the Day, 1/1/10
By on January 1, 2010 No Comments

Use Distributed Objects for local network communication.

User Interface Design for Mere Mortals™

Like this article? We recommend
User Interface Design for Mere Mortals™

David Chisnall explores some of the problems with the ubiquitous dialog box, and how it is commonly abused by developers. Would you like to know more? [Yes] [No]

Bad UI 10: Read This (OK/Cancel)

Dialog boxes are a pet hate of mine. They are quite possibly the most overused user interface element ever created. Since they are so overused, you might have thought that people would have worked out how to use them competently, but it seems not.

My favorite example is a cash machine near where I live. Wales is a bilingual country, where a lot of things are written in Welsh as well as English. When you put your card in a cash machine, you’re presented with a long question, and two options: Yes or No. You need to read this question every time, because sometimes it asks if you want the UI in English, and sometimes if you want it in Welsh.

What’s wrong with this interface? You actually need to read the question. If the options were "English" and "Welsh," you could completely ignore the question and skip to the right button immediately. Of course, with only these two options, the programmer could just choose one language as the default, and offer an option to switch to the other language when you enter the PIN. Even better, the program could ask you the question once and store your reply on your card (or with your account details on the server), so the machine would always use the correct language when you insert your card.

This is a particularly bad example, but dialog boxes are used in a similar way in a lot of applications. In Windows, the OK/Cancel dialog is almost ubiquitous. The real fun comes from some applications saying "Quit without saving, OK/Cancel" and others "Save changes before exiting, OK/Cancel."

Putting simple yes or no options in a dialog box ignores one very important fact; namely, that users almost never actually bother to read the text. When they do, they read it quickly and may miss something important. When a user quits an application, it might pop up a dialog box asking "Are you sure you want to quit without saving? (Yes/No)" or "Do you want to save before exiting? (Yes/No)." The user recognizes some version of save in either message and probably won’t bother reading the rest in detail, with a 50% chance of hitting the right button.

Instead of Yes/No, the buttons could be Save/Quit (or Save/Don’t Save). In this case, it wouldn’t matter what the rest of the text said. The user can infer the long description from the verbs in the button labels. This approach also helps save time for the user, which is important in a good user interface.

When it comes to dialog boxes, there’s an almost religious debate between whether OK should go on the left or right. As with many other UI problems, this issue comes down partially to context and partially to locale. If you’re reading this article on the main Informit site, there’s a good chance that you speak (or at least read) English. One of the defining features of English and related languages is that letters are arranged in order left to right. People who learn English as their first language tend to regard movement to the left as backward and to the right as forward. This isn’t the case for all languages; some are read right to left, some top to bottom.

This principle gives a good clue as the order in which options in a dialog box should be presented. In a left-to-right reading locale, the option on the left will be perceived as "back" or "undo," while the one on the right will be perceived as "proceed." The placement used for each option is very context-specific. In the previous example, saving is probably the "forward" option, quitting without saving is the "backward" option, and aborting the quit operation is neutral, placed in the middle. This gives the following order for our newly phrased dialog box options: Don’t Save/Cancel/Save.

Another good rule is that options with the biggest potential for data loss should be the furthest "backward" (left, in English-speaking locales). People usually want the "forward" option, so they’re likely to get used to clicking that one. Therefore, it’s important to minimize the effect of clicking the "forward" button by accident. Consider the example of formatting a disk. It would seem that, in a confirmation dialog, the "proceed" option should be on the right. In this case, however, the "proceed" option can result in the loss of a lot of data, and therefore should possibly be on the left. Either way, the default option should be to cancel.

The blame for many bad uses of dialog boxes rests firmly with the creators of toolkits, who make it much easier to display a yes/no dialog than a more appropriate user interface. Programmers following the path of least resistance can end up designing some very bad interfaces because of this practice. The mark of a good UI toolkit is that it makes it easier to design good user interfaces than bad ones, but good toolkits are hard to find.

  • Share ThisShare This
  • Your Account

Discussions

agreed
Posted Jan 30, 2008 02:49 PM by MrZed
0 Replies
Nice Article
Posted Jan 19, 2008 02:51 AM by shantanu.oak
0 Replies

Make a New Comment

You must log in in order to post a comment.

Informit Network