Wouldn’t it be nice if manufactures agreed on an interface standard?

[Rodion15]

I’ve always found it incongruous that interfaces of all types vary so abruptly among makers.

For example:

You want to change the settings for a router, and the menus, options etc are located quite differently among different brands.

Or you try go change settings for a Windows app and the way to do it is quite different between similar apps.

This discourages users from using technology.

Wouldn’t it be nice if standards were made so interfaces are as similar as possible in functionality?

Not that all interfaces should look the same, each maker may use their own styles, but that they make life easier for users.

I’d like to get opinions on this.

 

[USAFRet]

If they don't look the same, they're not a standard.

But the various things in there ARE standard.
DNS is always DNS
IP address is always IP address.

The box may look a little bit different, but the one labeled "IP address" is just that.

 

[boju]

There's always some cooperation or government trying to outdo the other even if defies common sense. Unification is rare amongst a society of greedy bobs.

 

[Colif]

They do it to be different.

If everything looks the same it can be difficult to know what you are using. Take Chrome & Edge now, they are almost identical if you go to the same site in both, its difficult to tell which one you are in without looking at menus

I mostly use 1 browser but if I swap to other, its only when i go to sites I am not logged into on it that its obvious.

I don't want everything to be the same, already enough fake choices.. android or apple... choice? one or other or nothing. thats not choice. That is the illusion of choice.

 

[Rodion15]

This is something I think a lot about. The MASSIVE waste of time and energy this implies to us humans. I feel this is something that will be overcome with time, same as the first cars made, placed the accelerator, brakes and hand brake in crazily different places till there was a standard. An Audi and a BMW didn't lose any of its beauty because they agreed to an interface.
All this disparity in interfaces is mostly unjustified in my view (when it is justified, then it will get applause).

To us IT folks this may be of benefit, more jobs for us due to the unnecessary complexity this implies.
Just my opinion. Thanks for your answers.

 

[USAFRet]

This is something I think a lot about. The MASSIVE waste of time and energy this implies to us humans. I feel this is something that will be overcome with time, same as the first cars made, placed the accelerator, brakes and hand brake in crazily different places till there was a standard. An Audi and a BMW didn't lose any of its beauty because they've agreed to an interface.
All this disparity in interfaces is mostly unjustified in my view (when it is justified, then it will get applause).

To us IT folks this may be of benefit, more jobs for us due to the unnecessary complexity this implies.
Just my opinion. Thanks for your answers.

Gas, brake, clutch is standard.

Nothing else is. Parking brake? My F-150 is different than my Mini.
Turn signals are mostly the same, but head light switches, wiper controls, audio controls....all different.

Why should an Apple interface look exactly like a Windows interface?

Phone/tablet vs PC? Completely different. MS tried that with Win 8, and it failed badly.

Should Windows VideoEditor look exactly like Adobe Premier Pro? Why?

 

[Rodion15]

Gas, brake, clutch is standard.

Nothing else is. Parking brake? My F-150 is different than my Mini.
Turn signals are mostly the same, but head light switches, wiper controls, audio controls....all different.

Why should an Apple interface look exactly like a Windows interface?

Phone/tablet vs PC? Completely different. MS tried that with Win 8, and it failed badly.

Should Windows VideoEditor look exactly like Adobe Premier Pro? Why?

Wouldn't it be best if different apps such as:

Windows VideoEditor and Adobe Premier

Chrome and Firefox

etc

- Locate the different menus (Settings, Import, Save, etc) in the top right corner and have the menu options in the same hierarchical order on both.

- Only differ when really necessary: to add granularity or simplicity to the interface.

However:

- Used different core programming, with some more granular than others.

- Have differing styles and general look, this is fine and makes both richer and distinguished.



macOS and Windows 10:

• Same keyboard shortcuts when it’s not justified that they’re different: how can it be better to take a screenshot with Command + 4 or with Windows + PrtScrn. Or switch between apps with differing shortcuts?

There’s a massive amount of interfacing that can be standardized for user’s benefit.



It’s true that having different interfaces is a sign of the times: more freedom and more choice at the great expense of making life to users MUCH MORE difficult.



My humble opinion is that, sooner or later, we’ll have to resort to this “freedom restrictions” for our mutual benefit. Everyday users need it more and more as we’re more and more dependent on technology.

 

[USAFRet]

Chrome, Edge, Firefox....the main drop down for Settings, etc...all 3 have it at the top right.
Back, Forward, Refresh...all at the top left.

Windows VideoMaker and Adobe Premier are two completely different animals.
Both work with "video", but Premier has sooo many more features and options. Like comparing a Honda Civic to a F1 car. Both have 4 wheels and an engine, but in no way comparable.

 

[Colif]

haha, getting Apple & Microsoft to do it the same way... Apple was think different, not a clone. They may lean on each other but outwardly they competitors for fan boys to take sides with.
Android and IOS are different because people like different things.
where does creativity shine if everything is the same?
sounds very grey and boring to me.

 

[Rodion15]

Creativity is more that just an external interface. The cost of all that differing creativity is getting higher and higher as we get more dependent on technology. Same as Chrome and Edge have equalized on some of the interface, standardizing interfaces as much as is reasonable and possible would make our lives much easier. Technology is getting out of being a luxury to being an essential.

 

[ClapTrapper]

I'm gonna throw in my 2 cents...The reason a company doesn't want to have interchangeable parts with their competitors is to make a profit -the reason any company exist.

There is a monetary advantage to being the "standard" that all the other companies bow to.
Every company wants to set the standard or at least make a cable/power supply/whatever that the customer is more than likely to buy from them. Mo money!

Old farts on the forum,ummm,I mean distinguished experienced computer enthusiasts such as myself will remeber the phrase "IBM compatible". Now you are tasked with buying computer stuff for your company. If it is not IBM compatible you will run into problems,cost the company money,and be fired.

What do you do? Look for "IBM compatible" or pick up the rotary phone and call IBM?

Money!
It's always about money!

 

[hotaru.hino]

A lot of "standards" are there because they were developed in a time when there was little to no understanding of how people would use the thing. Over time companies, software, and whatever filter out to what we have today and the only reason why they're still different is because that's what they grew up with. The only reason why Apple still continues to use Command for most shortcuts which would be Alt in the Windows world is because that's Apple decided decades ago that's a thing and many people who use Apple computers have likely used Apple computers for a long time and they're not going to switch.

In fact, in some cases, it would be a waste of time and money to convert to some new standard because you have to throw everything you've built up over the years away. Imagine if Windows went to what Apple does. Not only does Microsoft have to update their manuals, so does everyone else. Similarly if Apple went to what Windows does, the same thing applies.

There's also the case that there's never really going to be a one-size-fits-all solution for many things. To say "well we got car pedals standardized, so why can't we have video editing software UI standardized" fails to realize pedals only have three, now more likely two controls. Video editing has many orders of magnitude more things to do. Some people like how some UI works over others.

Also this is the standard response I will share with anyone trying to say "we should have one universal standard"

 

[OrlyP]

Not all reasons are bad, per se. Many of these differences were born out of innovation. Designers and engineers of UI/UX typically try to bring to the surface or give focus to a set of strong features that their product has, among other reasons. That pretty much influences the final UI/UX.

But on a serious note, they go out of their way make things their own or unique... or lest be accused of plagiarizing IP or for patent/copyright infringement. Remember in the beginning when Apple accused Microsoft of copying their GUI, even though the blind can tell them apart?

 

[thx1138v2]

Most modern cars have a fuel tank vent valve that opens when the ignition is turned on. It's presence prevents the gas tank from collapsing when the fuel is pumped out of it. Why do all the auto makers use different valves? Patent rights. If they wanted to use someone else's they would have to pay for the right to use the patent. at just a dollar a pop that would be roughly $3,000,000. They can just patent their own and only have to pay the attorneys and they have plenty od attorneys on board.

This gets more complicated because the patents expire every 20 years or so (it get's complicated) so the manufacturers are always having to reinvent the wheel, so to speak, to continue the process.

Standards? Sure, there are standards. But how those standards are achieved is another story.

 

[Rodion15]

I agree on most of the whys and hows. This is how the word market works and was as an easily foreseeable outcome of globalization and the free-market economy. I don’t mean to be pessimistic, on the contrary, it's marvelous to see technological progress. But sooner or later there has to be some standardization, a moment to pause and agree.

Thanks for your comments, I wanted to have this kind of dialogue long ago.

 

[USAFRet]

There's lots of standards.
HDMI, ATX, USB, ethernet, WiFi...
Gasoline formulation, bolt sizes...
Battery sizes and voltage, charging rates...
Bicycle and motorcycle helmet testing...

Software interface and features?
No thanks.

I can use 3D Builder or Rhino3D to create a model for my 3D printer.
In no way should those two things look and act the same.
They can and do, however, save to the same file type. A standard...

 

[Rodion15]

Look at Chrome and Firefox side to side:

Chrome calls the settings menu “Settings”, Firefox calls it “Options”

Sign in to…(not here in Chrome)

This doesn’t mean both should have the same features: It’s obviously fine that Firefox adds any granularity or extra features, but if both have a Settings menu, why not call it and place it in the same spot, with different aesthetics or icons, but in the same place, for God’s sake!

Apply this to all the thousands of similar interfaces that functionally do exactly the same (albeit with different underlaying programming and performance, which is great) and work out how much time and energy is spent on this disparity.

 

[USAFRet]

why not call it and place it in the same spot, with different aesthetics or icons, but in the same place, for God’s sake!

And one company will sue the other for plagiarizing their interface.

And "top right corner" would seem to be "in the same spot".

 

[Rodion15]

And one company will sue the other for plagiarizing their interface.

And "top right corner" would seem to be "in the same spot".

All right mate, you win. We'll stick in our ways then

 

[hang-the-9]

This is something I think a lot about. The MASSIVE waste of time and energy this implies to us humans. I feel this is something that will be overcome with time, same as the first cars made, placed the accelerator, brakes and hand brake in crazily different places till there was a standard. An Audi and a BMW didn't lose any of its beauty because they agreed to an interface.
All this disparity in interfaces is mostly unjustified in my view (when it is justified, then it will get applause).

To us IT folks this may be of benefit, more jobs for us due to the unnecessary complexity this implies.
Just my opinion. Thanks for your answers.

But the windshield wiper activation, lights activation, how the radio works, transmission shifters, parking brake lever location, number of cupholders, how the seats are designed, how many doors they have, if there is a sunroof, how many cylinders the engine has, how to get to hoses or electronics in the engine, where the oil filter is located, how much power a car has, those are all different.

Would you have all cars use the same design so mechanics and owners can work on them all equally?

 

[Rodion15]

But the windshield wiper activation, lights activation, how the radio works, transmission shifters, parking brake lever location, number of cupholders, how the seats are designed, how many doors they have, if there is a sunroof, how many cylinders the engine has, how to get to hoses or electronics in the engine, where the oil filter is located, how much power a car has, those are all different.

Would you have all cars use the same design so mechanics and owners can work on them all equally?

What's the point of calling Settings / Options differently on two browsers? or place a setting on a wildly different place if they both do exactly the same? Think of the mental energy and time wasted by users. The car analogy is quite different, nobody is using 120 cars at the same time every day. We're using hundreds of unjustifiably different interfaces every day. If we had to switch many cars every day then we'd better agree on a standard or we would crash all the time.

 

[Rodion15]

The car analogy is quite different, nobody is using 120 cars at the same time every day. We're using hundreds of unjustifiably different interfaces every day. If we had to switch many cars every day then we'd better agree on a standard or we would crash all the time.

What's the point of calling Settings / Options differently on two browsers? or place a setting on a wildly different place if they both do exactly the same? Think of the mental energy and time wasted by users.

For example: Firefox is better on some points like privacy, the styles and look are nicer to my taste, that's why it may survive, not because it places the bookmarks management in wildly different places.

This to me is a very important subject to be honest.

Thanks for your opinion

 

[boju]

The power supply is a good example of this. Why not use same wiring diagram throughout. Wouldn't that be convenient in a modular sense, not needing to disconnect any of the cables except from the PSU itself. Nope, you do that then it's a most certain BOOM.

 

[hotaru.hino]

The power supply is a good example of this. Why not use same wiring diagram throughout. Wouldn't that be convenient in a modular sense, not needing to disconnect any of the cables except from the PSU itself. Nope, you do that then it's a most certain BOOM.

Honestly I don't see myself taking out the PSU more often than I need to unplug my components for some reason or another.

 

[boju]

Honestly I don't see myself taking out the PSU more often than I need to unplug my components for some reason or another.

That's true. Besides some of the plugs being a pita sometimes, it's not a chaw you'd do often. Though, convenience is one aspect of it, there are still people reusing cables unaware of the dangers. Have seen many fried drive threads and whatever else over the years.