Is interface consistency a good thing?

[Project]

Just ran into this blog post

http://homepage.mac.com/hms92/iblog/C183740000/E20051224104250/index.html

What do you guys think? He has a point IMO, especially when I have a number of these Mail-themed apps open and hit Expose. I often have to run my mouse over the window to get a description of it just in order to see what app it is exactly.

Perhaps this is a reason why Apple has the several themes going on right now, with iTunes, iPhoto, Mail etc all sporting different looks. But all I ever see is people moan about the lack of consistency on this front.

I think so that as long as the actual interface is consistent - be it clickthrough, dialogues, preferences etc, then the look of the app can vary. If people want it to be the same throughout, then maybe offer colour variations in the titlebar that you can specify per app, or another solution. Otherwise, the very essence of Expose becomes diluted.

What are peoples thoughts on this?

 

[runninmac]

I think its a good thing to have a consistant interface. I love the streamlined look of iTunes/mail so I hope they adopt that look

 

[After G]

I think interface consistency is a good thing.
Though i don't like the "10 x Word document icon in Dock" effect.
That's what mouseover names are for, I guess.

It wouldn't really help to have 10 different icons of possibly meaningless text preview.
I think the best solution would be to have a pane showing the last 10 things that were worked on, with full scrolling preview, in a Dashboard or equivalent layer.

 

[EGT]

Interface consistency is a good thing. I don't care if they keep changing it but please change it everywhere. I like the Mail interface.

 

[Malfoy]

Generally speaking I have to say yea. MS (despite everyone's hatred for them) has done this consistency thing perfect, as has Adobe. I haven't been using OS X long enough too comment about them. But I like everything they've done so far except itunes. I hate how itunes operates with a passion and I think WMP and even RealOne player was done better. Yep I think it's that bad.

 

[ryan42]

Interface consisitency as far as having apps use the same menus and commands is good. Having the same apperance is bad. I like iTunes because it's different. I like GarageBand for that too. Logic is beautiful. Consitency is boring.

 

[Coheebuzz]

Interface consisitency as far as having apps use the same menus and commands is good. Having the same apperance is bad. I like iTunes because it's different. I like GarageBand for that too. Logic is beautiful. Consitency is boring.

Agree! Applications in my opinion should have their own identity based on their function and there is nothing in Apples Interface Guidelines that says the opposite. UI consistency has more to do with the layout rather than the graphics used and as long the developers hire an interface designer to do the job then i can't see the problem. Getting an app to function properly and be easy to use has nothing to do with the backdrop picture used in an app, so i think people have just run out of things to complain. Thats a good thing of course!

 

[EGT]

I hate how itunes operates with a passion and I think WMP and even RealOne player was done better. Yep I think it's that bad.

Can you please elaborate?

 

[iMeowbot]

But I like everything they've done so far except itunes.

It used to work really well, until they decided to stuff in all that feature bloat without adapting the interface to match. It sure would be nice to see them revisit the program with fresh eyes, and stop pretending that it's still a basic jukebox program.