On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 14:03:04 -0500, Anne Gomez agomez@wikimedia.org wrote,
Interesting! Thanks for sharing, Kaartic.
You're welcome.
My initial reaction to the headline was captured in 1 sentence in this: "It also saves on bandwidth for data-conscious customers."
That's a valid point. As it's the case most of the times, these kind of decisions depend on the end-users of the design.
On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 19:22 +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 14:03:04 -0500, Anne Gomez agomez@wikimedia.org wrote,
My initial reaction to the headline was captured in 1 sentence in this: "It also saves on bandwidth for data-conscious customers."
That's a valid point.
Just to be sure I understood you correctly, you were referring to "Pull-to refresh" when you mentioned "It" in the following sentence,
"It also saves on bandwidth for data-conscious customers."
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Yes, from the article. The article suggests a move to auto-refresh automatically rather than manual refresh (among other ideas). Pull-to-refresh allows the user to decide when to download new content, giving them control over data usage. For example they might only decide to "pull" when on a wifi network rather than spend MBs on their data plan. As designers reconsider this interaction, I hope that they don't eliminate this option for those people. On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 8:55 AM Kaartic Sivaraam < kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 19:22 +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 14:03:04 -0500, Anne Gomez agomez@wikimedia.org
wrote,
My initial reaction to the headline was captured in 1 sentence in
this: "It
also saves on bandwidth for data-conscious customers."
That's a valid point.
Just to be sure I understood you correctly, you were referring to "Pull-to refresh" when you mentioned "It" in the following sentence,
"It also saves on bandwidth for data-conscious customers."
Correct me if I'm wrong.
-- Kaartic
Very important point.
This can also cause major problems for anyone who moves out of service range (happens a lot in the mountains around here, but is also likely to be an issue in a lot of other less developed areas) - if handled poorly, automatic refreshing can also cause them to lose whatever they did have up and leave them flying blind (a particular problem if what they pulled up was a map to, say, the next place with service).
-I
On 25/07/17 14:26, Anne Gomez wrote:
Yes, from the article. The article suggests a move to auto-refresh automatically rather than manual refresh (among other ideas). Pull-to-refresh allows the user to decide when to download new content, giving them control over data usage. For example they might only decide to "pull" when on a wifi network rather than spend MBs on their data plan. As designers reconsider this interaction, I hope that they don't eliminate this option for those people. On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 8:55 AM Kaartic Sivaraam <kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com mailto:kaarticsivaraam91196@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 2017-07-25 at 19:22 +0530, Kaartic Sivaraam wrote: > On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 14:03:04 -0500, Anne Gomez <agomez@wikimedia.org <mailto:agomez@wikimedia.org>> wrote, > > My initial reaction to the headline was captured in 1 sentence in this: "It > > also saves on bandwidth for data-conscious customers." > > > That's a valid point. Just to be sure I understood you correctly, you were referring to "Pull-to refresh" when you mentioned "It" in the following sentence, > "It also saves on bandwidth for data-conscious customers." Correct me if I'm wrong. -- Kaartic
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design