skip to main content
10.1145/142750.142789acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Survey on user interface programming

Published:01 June 1992Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper reports on the results of a survey of user interface programming. The survey was widely distributed, and we received 74 responses. The results show that in today's applications, an average of 48% of the code is devoted to the user interface portion. The average time spent on the user interface portion is 45% during the design phase, 50% during the implementation phase, and 37% during the maintenance phase. 34% of the systems were implemented using a toolkit, 27% used a UIMS, 14% used an interface builder, and 26% used no tools. This appears to be because the toolkit systems had more sophisticated user interfaces. The projects using UIMSs or interface builders spent the least percent of time and code on the user interface (around 41%) suggesting that these tools are effective. In general, people were happy with the tools they used, especially the graphical interface builders. The most common problems people reported when developing a user interface included getting users' requirements, writing help text, achieving consistency, learning how to use the tools, getting acceptable performance, and communicating among various parts of the program.

References

  1. 1.John M. Carroll and Mary Beth Rosson. Usability Specifications as a Tool in Iterative Development. In H. Rex Hartson, Ed., Advances in Human-Computer interaction, Volume 1, Ablex Publishing, New York, 1985, pp. 1-28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.Mark Fox. Private communication. Carnegie Group, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA. 1986.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.J.D. Gould and C.H. Lewis. "Designing for Usability - Key Principles and What Designers Think". Comm. ACM 28, 3 (March 1985), 300-311. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. 4.H. Rex Hartson and Deborah Hix. "Human-Computer Interface Development: Concepts and Systems for Its Management". Computing Surveys 21, 1 (March 1989), 5-92. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5.Ed Lee, Mark Linton, John Ousterhout, Len Bass, and Frank Hall. Interface development tools: Feast or Famine (panel). ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Proceedings UIST'91, Hilton Head, SC, Nov., 1991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.Sanjay Mittal, Clive L. Dym, and Mahesh Morjaria. "Pride: An Expert System for the Design of Paper Handling Systems". IEEE Computer 19, 7 (July 1986), 102-114. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Brad A. Myers. Creating User Interfaces by Demonstration. Academic Press, Boston, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. 8.Brad A. Myers, Brad Vander Zanden, and Roger B. Dannenberg. Creating Graphical interactive Application Objects by Demonstration. ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Proceedings UIST'89, Williamsburg, VA, Nov., 1989, pp. 95-104. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. 9.Brad A. Myers and Mary Beth Rosson. "User Interface Programming Survey". SIGCHI Bulletin 23, 2 (April 1991), 27-30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.Brad A. Myers and Mary Beth Rosson. "User Interface Programming Survey". SIGPLAN Notices 26, 8 (Aug. 1991), 19-22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.Brad A. Myers. State of the Art in User Interface Software Tools. In H. Rex Hanson and Deborah Hix, Ed., Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, Volume 4, Ablex Publishing, 1992, pp. (in press).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12.Mary Beth Rosson, Suzanne Maass, and Wendy A. Kellogg. Designing for Designers: An Analysis of Design Practices in the Real World. Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI+GI'87, Toronto, Ont., Canada, April, 1987, pp. 137-142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13.Kurt J. Schmucker. "MacApp: An Application Framework". Byte 11, 8 (Aug. 1986), 189-193.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.jimmy A. Sutton and Ralph H. Sprague, Jr. A Study of Display Generation and Management in interactive Business Applications. Tech. Rept. RJ2392, IBM Research Report, Nov., 1978.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.David Wolber and Gene Fisher. A Demonstrational Technique for Developing Interfaces with Dynamically Created Objects. ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Proceedings UIST'91, Hilton Head, SC, Nov., 1991, pp. 221-230. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16."WordPerfect for Windows in The Final Stretch". WORDPERFECT REPORT 5, 3 (Fall 1991), 1-3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.Douglas A. Young. The X Window System: Programming and Applications with Xt. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1989. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Survey on user interface programming

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CHI '92: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
          June 1992
          713 pages
          ISBN:0897915135
          DOI:10.1145/142750

          Copyright © 1992 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 1 June 1992

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Article

          Acceptance Rates

          CHI '92 Paper Acceptance Rate67of216submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader