Horrors of usability #1
September 14th, 2009 1 Comment
I was using a horrible application called QMAP today. It’s a program for drawing “process maps” – that is, flow charts representing a process. In my case I was editing some diagrams of our documentation processes. But please, next time, give me Visio. Please!
Think Visio is clumsy and annoying to use? Try using QMAP!
Anyhow, I had linked one diagram to another diagram as a child process, but then changed my mind and wanted to remove the link. I selected the little box that (intuitively? I think not) represents a linked diagram, and I pressed the delete key. The following message was displayed. 
Now, of course, with hindsight, I should have taken my time, read the message over several times, considered its implications, thought long and hard about what I should do next and then, and only then, proceeded cautiously. Maybe I’m just too used to software that works sensibly.
Did I want to store CHILD GROUP “2” (as it so nicely called the diagram I’d actually named “Review Process”) inside the trashcan? Well, no, I did not want to store it inside the trashcan, I just wanted to remove the link on this diagram. So the answer was no. Right?
So I clicked No. Big mistake!
What this dialog box was really asking me was: “Do you want to delete this diagram?” But for some reason, the developer had kindly thought to include within this dialog box the option to delete the diagram irrevocably, without placing it in the Recycle Bin, and without bothering to offer me an “Are you sure you want to delete this?” opportunity to change my mind. One false click and a couple of hours’ work vanished into thin air.
So let’s consider some of the things that are wrong here:
a) The word “delete” is never mentioned.
b) Instead it refers to the normal deletion operation that we all know and love as “storing inside the trashcan” (“inside” mind you – not “in” or “on” or “underneath” or “nearby”, but “inside”).
b) It uses some weird nomenclature to refer to a diagram I’d already named, so it’s not clear what I’m about to “store” (or not).
c) By answering “No” to this question I am just saying I don’t want to do the thing it has offered: to store something inside the trashcan. I am not saying anything more than that. I’m just saying “No – don’t do that.” However, the software assumes that because I don’t want to do the thing it’s offered to do, I obviously do want to do this other thing: the thing it hasn’t actually mentioned, namely delete my work instantly and forever.
d) The dialog box also has two other buttons: “No to All” and “Yes to All”. However, I’d only selected one thing, so what were these “all” things. All what?
This is just the tiny, but ghastly, tip of the enormous iceberg of horrors that is QMAP usability (or lack of).
I can only hope you never encounter this application.
Potentially similar posts
- Putting the flare back into a sluggish Flare – December 2009
- Using Publish2 to create a “What I’m Reading” list on your blog – August 2009
- Inkscape: the free alternative to Adobe Illustrator – June 2009
- Speeding up Windows Explorer in Vista – November 2008
- Making Microsoft Word tabs decimal – November 2008
September 15th, 2009 at 8:45 am (#)
Ah! The unintelligible message! I've come across quite a few and have even highlighted some bad ones in conference presentations. I have a section on my blog just for user experience stuff where I rant and rave about these sorts of 'messages' that are supposed to help the user but actually make the experience much worse for them. See my blog posts on this topic here: http://cybertext.wordpress.com/category/technical-writing/user-experience-technical-writing/