confusing menu - time span - Android
-
Hi,
the Android app has a confusing menu on the bottom. There are three menu points: Time - mode - model
Both mode and model show the current setting but time shows what happens when you click on the label. Why does the time no also show the current setting?
Thanks Wolfgang! -
@windywolle
You clearly see on the timeline whether you are in 1h or 3h timestamp.
The 1h/3h button is not a title or a label, it is a button to switch to the other timestamp.
If the timeline is in hourly view, would you like the switch button to show 1h?
That would not be obvious nor logical to press it to change for 3h.
But this could be improved with a different appearance of this button. -
@idefix37 said in confusing menu - time span - Android:
But this could be improved with a different appearance of this button, different from the 2 labels next to it.
Exactly what I mean. Both other buttons show the current setting and the time button shows what will happen - that's not a usual behavior for a user interface.
-
@windywolle
Just a personal idea: -
@idefix37 Nice but the touch area would be really small on mobile devices.
-
@marknagy
But you could keep the same area as the current button. There no need to toggle only one of the 2 switches. Just touch the same sensitive area:In fact the switches would not be real switches, just drawings like the other icons in this bar.
When touching / pressing this area the user will get automatically the opposite solution: -
@idefix37 Thanks for the sketches. Our team is working on the solution.
-
-
-
-
-
This is one of my (few) major issues with the Windy mobile apps. It's correct on the desktop site (with the toggle switch for "1h forecast"). On the mobile app it labels the opposite of what it's showing, whereas the other items on the bottom of the forecast show the current setting such as the forecast model.
I don't think the two toggle switches is a good alternative. The single toggle from the desktop is better than that. But just labeling it as what's currently shown would be perfectly acceptable.
Please, @MarkNagy?