11 comments

  • Andrew C, 1 month ago

    I feel like this is exactly the same as the hamburger menu only with even more ambiguous interaction design (ie a tab literally changing what it does when tapped).

    Why would a home tab bring up a list. The MORE tab crammed in the bottom right of many tab bars seems more consistent and obvious to me.

    6 points
    • Juan J. RamirezJuan J. Ramirez, 1 month ago

      True. But I also get the sense that they did this because the "more" tab feels like a bucket for "what's left and didn't fit anywhere else" and not a primary navigation mechanism. I think the goal here is to have the same functionality as the hamburger menu while keeping all the navigation contained in the bottom area.

      0 points
      • Andrew C, 1 month ago

        But that’s how taxonomy, especially at small screens, works. A laundry list of links, whether behind a more tab, a hamburger menu, or a home screen toggle thingy, is a catch all or junk drawer pattern.

        The links are there to provide coverage to users that may incidentally need them but not a marquee place that needs persistence. Conceptually that’s fine if you’re not cutting those out. At least a more tab neatly fits the standard interaction model of a tab bar.

        Btw I think the home tab toggle is a neat idea. It’s just not really solving the underlying issue.

        2 points
  • Jim SilvermanJim Silverman, 1 month ago

    the best alternative to the hamburger menu is good information architecture.

    5 points
  • Miklos Philips, 1 month ago

    Unlabeled icons - bad usability. I guarantee you this would test terribly with people.

    3 points
  • Thomas Michael SemmlerThomas Michael Semmler, 1 month ago

    This has nothing to do with the burger menu. The burger menu is not called that because its on the top right or because something opens when you tab it, its called like that because of its icon. If you put the same icon to the bottom left, it's still a burger menu. Though I am aware that people use the term ambiguously nowadays.

    The value in here does not come from the icon or from the drawer / slide-in, it comes from the position. This is a well established pattern and has been talked about for quite a while, as the majority of screens have become increasingly larger.

    The things that are bad in drawer-type navigations are still bad here, but worse because there is a third type of interaction on this button that the other buttons don't have. We also know that these types of hidden navigations lead to bad UX, in general. But I personally think that it's important to not take this as gospel. Every audience is different and screens have become even larger since this article was published.

    2 points
  • Harper Lieblich, 1 month ago

    This pattern overloads a pretty critical affordance when a simple filter pattern would do.

    Narrowing down your IA to four or five important top level locations is hard to do, but it’s an important part of good design.

    1 point
  • Michael Andreuzza , 1 month ago

    I like it a lot.

    I am using a toggle in my website in desktop, and mobile. I just a toggle where it says Menu to thumb reach when on mobile.

    you can see it here if you fancy.

    http://colorsandfonts.com/

    1 point
  • Andy Dent, 1 month ago

    "Users will notice" a second tap? You're kidding, right? That's a completely new gesture without any affordance. Maybe a long-press or 3D touch (depending on device) to trigger going deeper makes a bit of sense but it it is still invisible.

    Even worse, apply the jostled on a bus scenario. Now someone who accidentally stuttered on the button is in a menu they don't recognise without realising how they got there.

    1 point