Arbitrary abbreviations in phobos considered ridiculous

[James Miller]

On 13 March 2012 17:23, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> wrote:
> 1. Such animations need to be *FAST*. We're talking roughly 250ms max
> (probably even less, but I'd have to play around with it to refresh my
> memory). Most UI animations are slower than this (particularly on the web -
> although many DVDs are *FAR* worse), and while it's good for first-time
> users, for everyone else it just gets in the way of getting work done and
> makes the experience feel sluggish.
>
> 2. On the web, animation means JS. But not everyone is using a browser with
> that V8 engine or whatever it's called (the one that Chrome uses). And not
> everyone is using a quad-core system with 64-bit software and 16GB or
> whatever RAM, etc. like the well-supplied web developers are likely using.
> So frequently this means very choppy, sluggish animations. And that's a much
> worse UX than popping. This also gets in the way of being able to properly
> handle #1 above, *fast* animations.
>
> 3. People have also reported that such UI animations can convey a subtle (or
> even not-so-subtle) sense of being patronized. Especially if it's a slower
> animation. I can definitely relate to this.
>
> (Of course, if people just make real applications instead of web apps, then
> those problems would be trivially solvable.)

Slow animations are a problem, but CSS transition are helping make
this less of an issue. And as long as you aren't trying to be too
over-the-top then your normally fine. Sliding tends to be ok for most
things, and fades are fast everywhere. I agree that slow animations
are annoying though, I only do it for things that are loading anyway,
so the slow animation doesn't actually slow down interaction. (I'm
talking 1-2 second-long credit card transaction situations).

--
James Miller