If anyone has a better title for this story, please comment.
Great comment on that article.
Yes, wow. No kidding. I had absolutely no idea this was a recurrent gripe… That commenter must have been pretty frustrated over the years.
This design is inferior to a traditional calculator keypad layout.
An editable calculation history is a great idea, but the author didn’t invent it; not even close. It’s been a standard feature in graphing and computer calculators for decades. It doesn’t frequently show up in phone interfaces because of the huge amount of space used by the giant-finger-supporting interface, but I’m sure a little poking into the depths of the advanced calculators in various app stores would reveal a bunch that support it in some form or another.
On the other hand, it’s just a calculator app, so the cost is absolutely minimal. If my criticism doesn’t hold, then I guess people will use it and like it, and it’ll be pretty straightforward to prove me wrong. It’s when changes to non-optional interfaces are made with flagrant disregard for user expectation and habit and poor consideration of the consequence that real problems arise.
Link to the paper discussed in the article.
I won’t be using it. I can type very fast on traditional keypads thank you very much.
Is it just me or do I see a lot of articles starting with “Why I …” that all seem to sound the same?
or my personal favorite: