The "personal taste" argument comes up a lot in usability conversations. I find it to be incredibly weak. I might personally prefer to walk blindfolded across busy roadways. But that doesn't make it broadly easy or advisable.
It's just simply a bad decision. There shouldn't be a preference, it should just be on by default, end of story. It only makes sense on iPads.
The fact that it's auto-hide by default means that most mac owners will just simply have their machines set to auto-hide the scrollbar, and very likely have no idea that a setting exists- Then blame it all on the content owners for making a bad/hard to use site. (especially if they decide they want a scrollable pane with OS specific scrollbars on it)
To expand a little bit, even something as seemingly arbitrary, like driving on the right or left side of the road, is not a matter of preference. If you pick the wrong one in a certain country, you can equally get yourself killed as with your other more obviously wrong "preferences". There is value in having everything work in a standard way.
This smacks of fascism, if I may be so blunt. It's preference as long as you do not hurt with your decisions any one else. Not turning your headlights on at night while driving on a public street is NOT a preference you can have, because it effects others. Not turning your headlights on while driving on your own exclusive and private drive way IS preference, as the only person you are likely to kill is your self. Not having any scroll bars on is preference because the only one it effects is the user.
I think a more important question is, what kind of design are you using that people can not instinctually figure out that they need to scroll? If your site needs to be scrolled horizontally (and its not painfully obvious that that's the case) it's a bad design. And if your user can not figure out that they need to scroll vertically, the are an idiot, or it's a truly bad design. In the former case, stop catering to the stupidest 5% of the population. Just like with people who use IE 7 in 2013, you'll never be able to properly serve them. And if its because of your design, redesign the damn site rather then pushing your preference onto the user.
I'm sorry, what smacks of fascism? The choice, in this case, is Apple's, inflicted on all of its customers.
If anything that is not obviously harmful can be reduced to mere "preference" then what is the point of hiring designers? just deliver raw html code and a textfield for users to write in their own css, right?
Of course, I admit this is reducing the argument to absurdity, but so is calling my position "fascism".
In truth, as product designers we make all kinds of decisions on behalf of our users. We use a system of judgement to rank the "goodness" and the "badness" of those decisions based on whether they make our user's lives easier or harder. (or make us more or less money, depending on your ethos)
In what way does hiding the scrollbar improve anyone's lives? In the cases where it demonstrably makes user's lives harder, explain why that doesn't matter?
Some people argue that Apple limits the users by not giving them enough options. You are of the opinion that Apple provides entirely too many user options. Not only should the users always have scroll bars on, but they also should not have the ability to turn them off. (correct me if I misunderstood)
what "some people" argue is irrelevant here. Who are "some people" anyway? "Apple provides entirely too many user options" is not in any way the argument I've made. My argument is that having this specific option is a mistake. If you want the generalised form of that argument, it is:
1. this, and other "preferences" are not arbitrary or meaningless. They have real consequences (even if the only real consequence is minor annoyance)
2. the presentation of too many choices is in fact, a real and well documented anti-pattern in UI-design. Too many choices is cognitive overload. Programmers like choices. programmers like power. but ordinary mortals don't care what colour their window title bars are, as long as the colour doesn't get in the way of their job.
3. Given the above, it is the UI designer's responsibility to be very opinionated about what the defaults of a system should be, and what should be configurable as a choice. (the fewer choices the better, generally, from a design perspective.)
4. as a corollary to that, I am aware that "some people" are uncomfortable about Apple's lack of configuration options. Those people are not designers, and should not ever be put in the position of designing a UI. Or you end up with a monstrosity like the desktop linux ecosystem. It's essentially an argument from ignorance of the research.
>My argument is that having this specific option is a mistake.
That's a belief. I don't see any argument here. Why is it a mistake?
Perhaps modern users, not tied to a legacy of scrollbars, could not care less about them? Perhaps 95% of users (with the exception of hackers) not even use them or notice them when they are there?
>Those people are not designers, and should not ever be put in the position of designing a UI.
Whereas you are? And we should take your opinion on scrollbars over Apple designer's one, because?
"Designers" should never be put in a position of designing a UI. Claiming the mantle of "designer" usually seems to reveal a preference for static aesthetics over functional utility.
Nearly every time I see someone talking about "design" in the realm of user interfaces, or about making software "beautiful", they're invariably attempting to use concepts applicable to media intended for the presentation of information to a viewer in the context of an interface intended to facilitate dynamic interaction between a functional tool and the user, and it always seems to make the software more limited, less productive, and more frustrating to use.
A user interface is about exposing software functionality and enabling users to maximize their efficient use of their tools. Optimizing a UI to look good in a screenshot means not optimizing the UI to provide efficient access to the functionality of the application, and not optimizing the flexibility of the application for users to adapt it to their own priorities and work styles.
This trend of attempting to exercise top-down control over user experience needs to end, and software developers need to start paying attention to what users are actually trying to do with the products they build, instead of deferring to inappropriately-applied theoretical models offered by visual designers.
Design is how it works. Not how it looks. How it looks is properly called "style".
If you have found a "Designer" who is overly concerned with how it looks and not so much how it works, the conclusion to reach is that you have found a bad designer, not that all "designers" are concerned only with aesthetics.
If "design" is meant to refer to how things work rather than how they look, then it's clear that the majority of people talking about "design" with respect to software UIs are using the term incorrectly.
People who call themselves "designers" in this context, and at the present moment, generally are prioritizing screenshot aesthetics over functional utility, and we're getting worse software because of it.
Well you're not wrong about that. The word "design" and "designer" is vastly misunderstood by everyone, including many of the people who go around calling themselves "designers". It's like the problem the programming industry has with people applying to jobs, calling themselves "programmers", and who can't code the most basic things.
Except, that in the case of the designers, since the person giving the interview also does not know what design actually entails, they get hired.
The situation has led to actual designers inventing a new title to give themselves "UX", which I predict will also quickly get watered down to mean basically nothing.
It's kind of really sad. and frustrating.
Another problem is a real designer, calling themselves a designer, gets hired by an organisation that has the wrong idea about what a designer does, and so gets pigeonholed out of any important decision making processes, and only is allowed to be involved at the very end of the process.
A very good designer can get around this, but they often don't have much power in the organisation to do anything about this pigeonholing.
See argument upstream-
in summary, autohiding scrollbars:
Pros:
Looks tidier sometimes
Cons:
Causes frustration and confusion.
My question is: whose lives have been significantly improved by the addition of this feature? why does it exist?
> Whereas you are?
yes
> And we should take your opinion on scrollbars over Apple designer's one, because?
because I am right and Apple is wrong.
On top of that, the reaction to my position is so weird. Oh Zen, if you had your way we would be FORCED by your tyrannical fascist ways to look at ugly scrollbars ALL the time instead of just some of the time. :(
yeah, designers/programmers need to learn to spine-up, and make decisions instead of just leaving everything up to the user, even if it's just better defaults, and leaving a .ini file around for the people who desperately need to change something.
I am of an opinion that one only needs a scroll bar when scrolling. On OSX the scroll bars are always visible when scrolling. You think you know better, and would like to overwrite my preference with yours. I don't think we will ever agree. I like options you like rules.
What does autohiding the scrollbars add to your life? How does it improve it? You avoid this question. You have no answer.
On the other hand, the presence of this option causes confusion and frustration, and, one could argue, significant economic harm as a result of the confusion and frustration.
Why is your preference (which you have not, and possibly cannot explain) more important than the confusion and frustration of everyone else?
I think you have a strong preference in this case, and you wish to force your preference upon people in the name of the "common good." I'll let you figure out the definition of that behavior all on your own.
Instead of arguing about your clear authoritarian tendencies, here is my main reasons why I think hiding scroll bars is a good idea:
1. Information Overload: You should only show user information when they need it. Users need to know how much of the document is remaining, or where they are currently located, when they are scrolling. If they need the data, they are but a touch away from it.
2. Scroll Bars create anxiety in users who are actually reading your website. If you are under slight time pressure, as most of us are at all times, you will concentrate on your own progress through the page, rather then engaging with the content.
3. Shifting: Even on operating systems where it is the convention to always show the scroll bar, the scroll bar still disappears when there is no scrollable content. Many, websites are centered, and they have a tendency to shift the center of the website by the width of the website when the scrollbar appears and disappears. I find that behavior annoying.
4. Shifting in text boxes: when the scroll bar appears, once you typed enough text to fill the box, the text has to reflow, in order to accommodate the new scroll bar. I find this very annoying and distracting.
Finally, you keep referring to these mythical, internally confused people who keep reading only the tops of all the news articles and constantly wonder why the rest is cut off. Can you show me the following:
1. Any site that looks confusing on a mac without scroll bars. Something I can show to people and gauge their reaction.
2. Any study, article, or survey done on the subject that states that it's a severe problem. Not personal anecdotes, but actual evidence of some kind.
it's just, that you were supposed to scroll to actually read it. There was no way you could have known, since you're on a mac.
I would like to add that your use of the word "fascist" and "authoritarian" is a grave disrespect to those who are survivors of authoritarian regimes. If I were you I would think much more carefully before throwing such words around over scrollbar preferences
and you still think a scrollbar preference is worth calling "authoritarian"? odd. Maybe the soviet union wasn't as bad as everyone says, if that is the standard to judge by.
You have an authoritarian attitude. You have a particular opinion about how scrollbars should be, and you would gladly force your opinion upon me, if you could. Now, sure, that's a trivial matter. But I have a problem with the attitude. In any case, I am glad that, at least for now, I am entitled to my opinion, and and you are to yours, and I think that's great.
actually it was Apple that forced its decision on us.
I just think they should have made a different decision.
It's like commenting on sport- I don't actually have the vast power to affect people's lives like Apple does.
And reverting to reductio ad absurdum in an attempt to prove a logically weak position is better? Your closing works both ways. Your logic as far as I can see has basically been, to paraphrase; 'it annoys me'.
All recent (less than 3 years) Apple devices are sold either as touch devices or with touch enabled peripherals. Gestural interaction is the default paradigm of interaction on iOS/OS X (this is also true of Android devices). These users are largely used to this behavior, which can be changed if there is a desire to do so. This behavior does not affect users of other systems that don't support gestural interaction. There is no need therefore to cater specifically for Apple (or other) users as they, through daily interaction with their device, will intuit what to do. It puzzles me why the scrollbar still exists as an interaction device elsewhere. I really had to think about where and how they appear because I am so used to them simply not being there.
Perhaps you are looking at them in the wrong way. Where once the scrollbar was used for scrolling, it is now used to indicate the position the reader has reached on a page.
No, I read it easily; I simply used the trackpad to scroll. I disregarded it to because the premise is flawed, as has been pointed out to you. You don't have to agree with everyone else, but in real world use, with real world people, this is considerably less of an issue that you are making it to be.
Watch a child use touch-based interface. It's enlightening. They intuit the required interaction with consummate ease. Having observed how individuals still use scroll bars by tapping on the arrows and not realising that it's quicker to grab the bar, to me illustrates that using and relying on scroll bars is as much a learned behaviour, and a less intuitive one at that.
It's just simply a bad decision. There shouldn't be a preference, it should just be on by default, end of story. It only makes sense on iPads.
The fact that it's auto-hide by default means that most mac owners will just simply have their machines set to auto-hide the scrollbar, and very likely have no idea that a setting exists- Then blame it all on the content owners for making a bad/hard to use site. (especially if they decide they want a scrollable pane with OS specific scrollbars on it)
To expand a little bit, even something as seemingly arbitrary, like driving on the right or left side of the road, is not a matter of preference. If you pick the wrong one in a certain country, you can equally get yourself killed as with your other more obviously wrong "preferences". There is value in having everything work in a standard way.