03-19-2019, 01:11 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-19-2019, 01:12 PM by danbrotherston.)
(03-19-2019, 12:50 PM)trainspotter139 Wrote:(03-19-2019, 10:25 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: It does not matter that the system is implemented that way. What matters is how the users model of the system. Forcing your users to understand implementation details (including things like knowing what 'SV' stand for) is a guarantee that your users will not understand your system, and will make mistakes when using it. Good UX absolutely should remove access to information which doesn't enhance the user experience.
Presto is another example of an unnecessary and overly complex system. To this day, myself, a relative expert in how Presto works, still cannot figure out what every line in the presto record means, and generally I need a calculator to figure out how much I paid for one trip. That is a complete failure.
You really should go read the book "The design of Everyday Things" by Don Norman. It is eye opening.
The problem is, there is money involved. You simply can't remove access to the minute details of what goes on because it is relevant to users. Users who are money savvy are going to want to know those details.
You can have the best of both worlds here. You can have easy to read and easy to follow information about changes in card balance in the card history view AND access to minute details of a specific card tap without compromising UX.
Yes, you can remove those details, the designer is in fact in control of the user interface. When you see your bank transactions, you don't see every minutia of the transaction, but you see an impression of it consistent with your understanding of what a transaction is, and because it matches your mental model, you don't even object.
I'm sure some people have been curious as to what actually happens under the hood, but so what, it still works fine for them. Just because I'm a savvy user who want's to know those details (I don't actually), doesn't mean I should be allowed to know them. It's wrong to degrade the user experience for everyone, in order to satisfy the curiosity of a few users.
Yes, you can enhance the interface to provide access to this underlying data in some way, but that's not what was done here, just because you can provide access to this data doesn't mean this is a good interface. This is a terrible interface.