I'd like to add a thought: maybe inconsistency in UI design is the only way to experiment and actually improve the current state of design.
When Apple released its ipod (with the big wheel in the middle), it was nothing like the other players we were used to. Was it horrible? Was I annoyed by the difference? No, I thought it was cool, and I loved my iPod. Some years later, they did the exact same thing with the iPhone. Completely different, and yet, it set a new standard for design.
Now I understand the point of the article, and it's true that it's annoying to see every other small app coming up with new UI conventions. But I guess I'm not too radical about it: if this is the price to pay for innovation in UI design, I'll take it.
Agreed - note some of the most enduring new UI conventions we've come to expect in the last couple of years, all of which were pioneered by third-party apps bucking the trend (even in places where there was already established convention).
- Pull down to refresh (where Apple encouraged an explicit refresh button on the bottom of the screen)
- Swipe aside views (where Apple encouraged explicit navigation buttons)
- Slide aside menus (a la Path, where Apple expected tab bars to fulfill that role)
- Fan-out controls (a la Path, where Apple expected the use of drop downs)
The list goes on. I for one am happy that some people are unwilling to just follow the tried and true.
When Apple released its ipod (with the big wheel in the middle), it was nothing like the other players we were used to. Was it horrible? Was I annoyed by the difference? No, I thought it was cool, and I loved my iPod. Some years later, they did the exact same thing with the iPhone. Completely different, and yet, it set a new standard for design.
Now I understand the point of the article, and it's true that it's annoying to see every other small app coming up with new UI conventions. But I guess I'm not too radical about it: if this is the price to pay for innovation in UI design, I'll take it.