Which do you like the most?
Option 1: variable-height, 84+-style
 4%  [ 1 ]
Option 2: fixed-height, 84+-style
 0%  [ 0 ]
Option 3: variable-height, 83+-style
 0%  [ 0 ]
Option 4: fixed-height, 84+-style
 4%  [ 1 ]
Option 5: stylized
 88%  [ 22 ]
Option 6: None of the above
 4%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 25

The task is simple: look at the following image, which demonstrates five different ways calculator keys could be shown in text. Pick the one that you like the most, and vote for it. Tell me in replies if you have any specific feedback one why you like that one the best and/or what you dislike about the others. Think especially about which one would look the best, clearest, and neatest in print in a book.

You don't want to break the lines all that much, so I voted for 5. I think the others are too big. The only way I'd vote for the top 3 is if they fit inline, but not like 4 where they're cut off.
5 does not go far enough in my opinion. Just use button names, possibly in the same font they are on calculator, but drop the silly box around it.
You mean in text, like [GRAPH] and [Y=] and [3] and [ENTER]? How do the rest of you feel about that versus option 5?
Option 1 could be improved by removing the modifiers above each key and center-aligning the images to the text, not aligning the bottoms. 5 is perfectly fine IMO. If you wanted to improve the fifth option, try changing the shape of the rounded rects. For ex, have the boxes slightly resemble the key shape, but not to break the layout.
> like [GRAPH] and [Y=] and [3] and [ENTER]?
Like that, but without brackets. Just text in different font or icons.
5 is the best by far. Most legible and more pleasing to look at it. It sends your point extremely well. Everything else is just distracting.
I'm for 5 too. It's what I have seen on most calculators' manuals (well, I really only have seen Casio's, but still) and guides.

Not to mention variable-width is a bit incompatible with fixed line spacing, even if the images are properly vertically-centered.
Thanks for the feedback, guys. I think 5 is my favorite as well; the only thing I don't like is that the option 5 keys don't show the text above the keys the way 1/2 do. Although to be honest, the text above the keys in 1 and 2 is probably too small to read anyway. Nsg, I appreciate your suggestion, but when I tried it out, I couldn't pick out the keys well enough from the text; I feel like some readers might be confused.
KermMartian wrote:
Thanks for the feedback, guys. I think 5 is my favorite as well; the only thing I don't like is that the option 5 keys don't show the text above the keys the way 1/2 do. Although to be honest, the text above the keys in 1 and 2 is probably too small to read anyway. Nsg, I appreciate your suggestion, but when I tried it out, I couldn't pick out the keys well enough from the text; I feel like some readers might be confused.


I agree with your assessment of his opinion. Having the border around the button names makes them stand out on what you are supposed to press, and leaves little room to mis-interpret anything.
  
Register to Join the Conversation
Have your own thoughts to add to this or any other topic? Want to ask a question, offer a suggestion, share your own programs and projects, upload a file to the file archives, get help with calculator and computer programming, or simply chat with like-minded coders and tech and calculator enthusiasts via the site-wide AJAX SAX widget? Registration for a free Cemetech account only takes a minute.

» Go to Registration page
Page 1 of 1
» All times are GMT - 5 Hours
 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Advertisement