Links and Platform Smear
Michael McCracken discusses hypertext links as native UI elements and the proliferation of similar-but-different controls, which he calls platform smear. I think both links and mouseover effects should be confined to the Web (and hypertext editors such as VoodooPad). Platform smear is unavoidable, but its extent could be reduced. My suggestion would be for Apple to experiment with new interface ideas less publicly.
5 Comments RSS · Twitter
It's not that bad a thing. The web has conditioned users to know exactly what an underlined hyperlink does, and that lack of confusion is part of a good UI.
Some of the links aren't underlined except on mouseover. With Spotlight, they aren't underlined at all. Sometimes the link acts like hypertext (iTunes, Dictionary); sometimes it opens a different window or changes the view within the same program (Mail); sometimes it opens a window in a different program (Disk Utility); sometimes it acts like a radio button (Spotlight). Even the way the links handle clickthrough is inconsistent (and, unlike with buttons, there's no visual indication of what will happen). So, no, I don't think users know exactly what a hyperlink will do. We have real controls for most of these functions; why not use them?
I agree with Michael here - sure, users know what to expect from an underlined hyperlink, but these apps aren't doing what they expect! Never mind that they're not even always underlined.
At least they're not currently destructive. The first time I see a delete hyperlink in a native app, then I'll *really* worry.
Some of this functionality (ie Spotlight) might not be available if the experimentation didn't happen publicly.
But largely, yes, Apple should keep the custom UI to itself until things can be rolled into AppKit. Metal should have died a quick death behind the scenes. Same for drawers, at least in the current clunky incarnation.
I think it's time MacHack (sorry, ADwe've-lost-sight-of-our-rootsHOC) brought back the Bash Apple session. Not that SJ would attend...
Voodoo, I don't understand your first point. To me, it seems like Spotlight (the architecture and features) were developed mostly in private and delivered all at once in Tiger. I think this worked pretty well. The Spotlight interface has some public experimentation, and I see nothing in it that couldn't have been done with standard widgets. So I don't understand why you say that Spotlight might not be available.
