Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The whole article seems to be more of a style argument then a complexity argument. It presents the false dichotomy that things that are simple to operate, must have less controls. There is no reason why you can't have all the controls and a button that does everything very simply. First page of the manual should say, use the "auto" button, if that doesn't work for you, keep reading.

We've also been trained to want a manual override switch. When I think of simplicity in UI, I think of Apple. I remember when Apple stopped putting eject buttons on their Mac disk drives. A also remember constantly having to find a paper clip when the machine refused to eject the disc(often).

Secondly, there are always special cases where you need some extra control. It's hard to believe that the manufacturers software has accounted for everything. When I find a "bug" it's very frustrating to not be able to manually override the behavior.

Another case for complexity is if some sensor breaks, the appliance becomes useless. I remember shopping for a car in the early 90s (with my parents), and wanting manual windows because everyone I knew with electric windows had broken motors with windows that didn't work anymore. The situation is drastically improved now, but then, manual ruled. Sooner or later your "automatic" appliance won't work the way it did when it was first purchased. Having manual controls should extend the life of the appliance.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: