Why using “human language” won’t solve all UX problems.

?PC load letter? What the fuck does that mean??
– Micheal Bolton, Office Space

There are few things more infuriating than seeing a message like ?PC LOAD LETTER?. It?s practically an affront to hundreds of thousands of years of human communication. Generation after generation, humans have developed complex, nuanced ways to interact with each other, and then some machine comes along and orders us to ?PC LOAD LETTER?. We can deal with the machine being a bit curt, but it should at least get its point across, damnit.

So it?s not surprising that people are now designing software to sound a bit more human. There is zero question that it?s made software easier to use, and that?s helped more people to use computers. In the same way that it?s easier (for most people) to use a visual interface over a command line, ?human language? makes software more approachable, more comfortable.

However, this isn?t always the case – In some cases it can do the exact opposite. Let?s say that you were booking some office space online. While conveying the same information, which messaging would be clearer?

“Okay, your reservation is confirmed for?7 AM on Tuesday the 20th of March, until?10 AM on Thursday 22nd of March.”

Or

“Your reservation is confirmed:
Reservation begins: March 20th at 7 AM
Reservation ends: March 22nd at 10 AM”

It?s obvious that the second message is more clear, even if it sounds a lot less human. This is probably because of the principle of grouping – the concept that humans naturally look for patterns and groups. When each date is on it?s own line, we can easily separate the dates in our mind. When they are contained in a long sentence, we have to process where and what the useful information is

Knowing this, its always a good idea to question whether or not to use human language. If you?re really not sure, mock it up and check for yourself.?