That is this kind of thinking of engineers vs. regular user.
You know why Windows users are so prone to viruses and such? Because they learned to click "OK". They learned it, because they always got the question/offer if they want to proceed or not. But a regular user don't understand those technical details and you know, they don't _want_ to understand those details. So we learned them to click "OK".
The best UX for the regular user is any UI where regular users have less choices of technical details.
I said that already the other day: as an engineer myself, I were chatting with another engineer about a product they have done (device integrated into a car for special purposes). I said to him, that something feels wrong with the interface. Yes, all the required information is present. Yes, probably I myself would have designed the UI the same way. But over the time I've got some sense in terms of UX, which a product makes it compelling or just doing its job.
The same you see with smart home. For how long there are HVAC controls out in the field by Honeywell and others? The better one are all programmable in all regards. But only Nest, which removed a lot from the interface made the big wave.
That's not a good argument against my proposal. How is
Want to use this drive for Time Machine? [OK]
better than going into the time machine app / prefpane / whatever, and seeing [use drive WD-BOOK for time machine] on the side, non-modal? so people who don't know what they're doing don't have to click or even see anything?
UI/UX designers do a lot of really stupid stuff in the name of making things "simple" and "easy". Engineers who think they're more of a people person and know some UI/UX probably do it even more. Give up the gimmicks, the ridiculous space between elements. The material design, the flat-aqua design, it's all crap.
I've seen "regular users" fail to use all these things, and need my help find a way through the increasingly hidden and opaque interfaces to what they're trying to do. Usually because things that are supposed to "just work" instead "just don't work" and there's no way to fix it. Except for me. So interfaces designed for me would probably not be a bad idea ;)
Most of the users I know wouldn't know where to go to set up a Time Machine drive. The fact that it prompts them flat out is how they even got it set up in the first place.
You know why Windows users are so prone to viruses and such? Because they learned to click "OK". They learned it, because they always got the question/offer if they want to proceed or not. But a regular user don't understand those technical details and you know, they don't _want_ to understand those details. So we learned them to click "OK".
The best UX for the regular user is any UI where regular users have less choices of technical details.
I said that already the other day: as an engineer myself, I were chatting with another engineer about a product they have done (device integrated into a car for special purposes). I said to him, that something feels wrong with the interface. Yes, all the required information is present. Yes, probably I myself would have designed the UI the same way. But over the time I've got some sense in terms of UX, which a product makes it compelling or just doing its job.
The same you see with smart home. For how long there are HVAC controls out in the field by Honeywell and others? The better one are all programmable in all regards. But only Nest, which removed a lot from the interface made the big wave.