Hacker News Reader

Comment by thristian | Hacker News Reader

The browser select-multiple widget works like that because that's how it's worked in most desktop OSs since Macintosh System 1.0 in 1984 (at least). It's been simple and predictable and easily learned for decades, calling it "borderline unusable" is just hyperbole.

Now, if you wanted to say that HTML's standard widgets should be allowed to reflect the platform-native look-and-feel (for example, adding a "selected" checkbox on touch-screens, or supporting long-press to select items, or whatever) instead of being tied to Windows 95 appearance and behaviour by backwards-compatibility concerns, then yeah, I'd agree with that.

View on HN

It's "borderline unusable" because the vast majority of people who use computers probably wouldn't know how to select more than one item. There are no affordances and virtually nothing uses it any more.

Even in the early desktop era when it was popular, many non-enthusiasts probably just didn't know how to use a UI control like that. It just didn't cause a problem because most people didn't use computers much.

I would bet that most internet users today have never even used a UI where that control is popular.

If you're that worried "<p> hold shift to select more than one item.</p>" isn't a whole lot extra to add and is something most people can handle.

Probably wouldn’t be a great fit for touch or screen reader interfaces, though.

Touch screen OSes usually have their own implementations.

Which frankly is the best argument FOR using the built-in multiple select, since the custom widgets often fail on touch.

Some users don't know what key "shift" refers to.

You think people actually read what's on the screen...?

Never done tech support I take it!

So how do you expect them to use your product if you strawmen them as people incapable of reading?

Because they’ll only read what they believe is essential to their goal. Small text below a form element does not scream “critical” it doesn’t get read. I’ve watched many users use websites: they only read what they think is important and skip everything else.

Not just naive users either. I am very computer literate and yet I find myself in situations where I've skipped that text and only find it when I go back.

It makes me think when I'm designing things. If I have problems with stuff like that, how can I make it better.

Really, if people read everything they'd never get anything done. They see dozens to hundreds of things marked visually as important that they'll do fine ignoring, every single day. Of course they often miss the one or two per day that they actually needed to read.

Then there's the way styles are so different, especially on the web. Horribly user-hostile. How does this site mark something as important, assuming it bothers in the first place? Who knows. And if I'm only planning to be on it for 30s, I'm not going to learn that.

>. And if I'm only planning to be on it for 30s, I'm not going to learn that.

It's a standard UI control and it is used pretty often.

I guarantee you fewer than 50% of people who use a desktop computer at least once a week know how to multi-select and range-select using shift and ctrl on them, though. That's why you need the text—which many will, for reasons that are actually pretty good, ignore.

Or you could just use a better control.

It is standard but it is not used often. In fact, I can’t remember the last time I saw one used that want some ancient, intranet application built on Cold Fusion.

Many users don’t even know you can use a key shortcut to copy/paste.

How do I do it on my phone or tablet?

"* Command-key on MacOS that's the one that that has a ⌘ on it btw"

"‡ On a phone or tablet or whatever, ignore us, we're just confusing you."

> It's been simple and predictable and easily learned for decades, calling it "borderline unusable" is just hyperbole.

And it's also completely not discoverable. I only know how it works when I read from HTML book back in the day.

Just because it was the standard doesn't mean it's easily learned.

I agree that calling it borderline unusable, when it works great for power users on the desktop, is hyperbolic. Unfortunately for those power users, Digikey, one of the best electronics distributors and also one of the best examples on the web of parametric catalog search, recently disagreed, changing from the classic and highly functional control/shift + click to select multiple to a weird click and drag/click and repeat paradigm.

An order of magnitude more users are more familiar with iOS and Android than Mac System paradigms from 80s.

Those "Mac System paradigms from [the] 80s" are also the Windows paradigms from the 1980s to the 2020s. Still "an order of magnitude" more users more familiar with iOS and Android than that? I doubt it.

Android alone had 2.8 billion users in 2020, so I do not understand what kind of rationale can possible lead to think this is less than PC and Mac users.

Ah. So when I thought I was saying 2.8 billion isn't "an order of magnitude MORE" than the surely at least a billion people who've used Windows at some point in the last three and a half decades, I was actually saying "2.8 billion is less than at-least-a-billion"? Funny, that's not what I thought I was saying.

If you absolutely have to put words in my mouth, please make them at least a little less stupid ones. Maistuivat vähän paskalta.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com