Author here. You'd be surprised how many founders / operators I've spoken to over the past two years who work so hard to avoid discussing cancellations. At the core of it, they're hurt and scared by it. So yeah, it is dramatic. It's a very human phenomenon.
I think it's really interesting to look at what innate aspects of our humanity that made total sense 10, 20, 30k years ago (e.g being hurt by rejection) can negatively impact our modern lives, and how we can try to push past them.
Can we look past innate human characteristics? Isn’t that like saying we can thrive without a brain?
Do we avoid acting like animals or memorize shared memes that make it ok and help us ignore it; like believing confession erases all sin? Do we just chant “we’re not like those smelly apes” while piling shit into landfills and the ocean so we don’t feel like those apes?
Author here: I disagree that one can achieve the same effect by swiping near the center. A middle-to-left swipe on the phone doesn't make use of Paper's exciting physics-driven carousel. I can barely get any inertia swiping from the middle. Even worse, my thumb covers up most of the content and I have to make a "dabbing" motion to see a steady stream of stories.
I agree about the thumb covering the content, but in the short period of time I've spent with the app, I've found myself swiping from the middle - mostly along the bottom-edge of the screen. And I guess the physics-driven carousel hasn't been a huge problem yet since I've mostly been swiping to pan through the content for skimming. Guess that's the challenge of any interface - that different users may approach it in entirely different ways.
Anyway, nice study on the interaction, and thanks for your reply.
I just tried swiping from the middle. I can advance 13 stories by starting from the middle. How is that not enough inertia? Why would I need to swipe 20+ stories in a single motion, when I cannot read any of the titles when they go by that fast?
Was that swipe comfortable? Could you scan most of the headlines quickly, or was your thumb covering up most of them?
Paper's story carousel is designed to get you scanning headlines quickly with the inertial scroll. I believe that the current configuration — with its gestural shortcomings — does not ideally accomplish that goal.
Yes, the swipe was relatively comfortable, and because I use Paper as a regular user (not someone trying to dissect the UI) I am scrolling to view 2-3 elements at a time. I am not scrolling for speed. I fundamentally disagree with your idea that this interface was designed for efficiency. It seems to me that it was created as a playful, gestural interface, that is novel and fun to use. If they really wanted to design for efficiency it would have been a table view.
I also disagree with your statement that a strong inertial scroll is important. What is the use case for needing to put so much inertia into the carousal that you cannot read the titles? Why would being able to flick through 20+ elements in one swipe be useful?
I do agree, however, that the elements could be taller.
Looks like we use the app differently, which is entirely possible in this world ;) My assumptions were twofold: 1) users would like to scroll and scan quickly (because they're impatient), diving into content to find something that looked interesting to read, and 2) that the inertial scroll literally amplifies that action — potentially getting you something you want, faster.
Flinging the carousel has a playful factor (that you mentioned) and serves to immerse you more into the content. The fact, though, that I have to hurt my thumb to do this is a glaring problem, IMO.
I'll second that. I didn't even realize the importance of momentum when using the carousel at first. I was cursing the designers for making it so damn slow.
And that's my fault for not following the linked sources in the article.
While I agree wih all your points in your assessment, I'm curious about the point the research mentioned about users changing grips depending on task. Will this be a significant problem? Or would it be an unconscious adaptation.
Your point about reducing the hero image is a very good one. I hadn't thought of that. And even if it's a poor quality image, the content is mostly static and distracts from the entire purpose of the navigation: getting you reading stories.
At best, your enumeration is highly speculative. We can only see the finished products and a little bit behind the curtain (the iOS 7 videos, "Steve Jobs" by Isaacson, etc.) — iOS 7 is a work in progress and we don't know how he currently works, or what sort of "idea shaping" currently goes on.
Also, the headline is just that — a headline. It's to get people thinking or talking about who makes great products, and what constitutes a great product.
