In Praise of Buttons
Flat, minimalist interfaces are drawing criticism for making it harder to see what can be clicked or tapped, with many arguing that clear, chunky buttons and conventional link styling improve discoverability, reduce cognitive load, and aid accessibility. Commenters debate skeuomorphic versus flat design, the distinction between buttons and links, and how feedback, typography, and consistent patterns affect usability on both touchscreens and the web. Some see current trends as fashion-driven regressions and expect more explicit, button-like controls to return as design tastes shift.
Affordance, Discoverability, and Cognitive Load
- Many commenters want large, clearly delineated buttons and complain about “hunt and peck” UIs where you must guess what’s clickable.
- Flat, text-only, and icon-only controls are seen as increasing cognitive load because they rely heavily on context rather than self-evident appearance.
- Others argue that if context makes the clickability obvious, that can be sufficient, and the article underestimates how much context helps.
Flat Design vs. Skeuomorphism
- Several people feel design trends swung too far from skeuomorphic to ultra-flat, sacrificing usability for fashion.
- Some think moderate skeuomorphism (subtle 3D, shading) was a sweet spot; nostalgic praise goes to older systems like Windows 2000 and classic Mac.
- A minority questions whether skeuomorphism really “went too far,” noting that mimicking real-world objects can be intuitive.
Touch, Feedback, and Target Size
- Clear visual feedback on tap (where and whether an action registered) is called crucial, especially given missed taps and tiny touch targets on mobile.
- Multi-sensory feedback (sound, haptics) is appreciated but must be used judiciously.
- People criticize implementations where visual feedback fires but the actual click does not.
Buttons vs. Links and Semantics
- Distinction is drawn: links imply navigation and history entries; buttons imply actions/side effects on the current state.
- Accessibility guidelines and lawsuits are mentioned as reasons to respect semantic differences, though some call this fearmongering.
- Styling links as buttons is considered tricky but often necessary; misuse can confuse screen readers and users.
Aesthetics, Consistency, and Design Fashion
- Some find the article’s proposed redesigns dated or ugly, though they agree with the usability critique. Others accept older-looking buttons as a worthwhile tradeoff.
- Debate centers on whether Apple-style “ghost buttons” and text back-links are bad patterns or reasonable, consistent OS conventions.
- Several note that UI trends are cyclical; “real” buttons are expected to come back when flat design feels old.
Physical Buttons, Automation, and Devices
- Multiple commenters extend the praise to physical buttons, criticizing touch surfaces on appliances and remotes.
- Robot-based UI testing and device provisioning benefit from clear, consistent button shapes, though some question how common this need is.
Accessibility, Power Users, and Settings
- iOS accessibility options (button shapes, high contrast, labels) significantly help some users, especially those with ADHD or dyslexia.
- There’s disagreement over how many “power users” exist today and whether minimal, hidden controls are justified by user experience levels.