What UI first distinguished radio buttons from checkboxes with circles/squares?
azeemba
3 days ago
59
38
https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/31806/what-ui-first-distinguished-radio-buttons-from-checkboxes-with-circles-and-squar
block_dagger7 hours ago
What UI uses circles with checkmarks in them as “OK” buttons? iOS 26. Facepalm.
johnisgoodblock_dagger7 hours ago
Can I see a screenshot of that? Sounds weird.
johnisgoodvbezhenar3 hours ago
Is it not just a circle shaped button?
LoganDarkjohnisgood2 hours ago
They said it was a circle with a checkmark in it as an "OK" button, which is exactly what it is; they never said it was a radio button.

Here is a screenshot of what actual checkboxes and radio buttons look like on iOS 26 Beta 2: https://imgur.com/a/TwMRW4X

wqwetoblock_dagger7 hours ago
And Delphi
aidos7 hours ago
More crucially, when did we lose the ability to click and hold on the first checkbox and then drag down the list to set them all the same way!

> 1982: Dragging through a field of check-boxes flips the state of the first and assigns the new state to all other boxes dragged through.

exiguusaidos6 hours ago
What comes close are multi-select patterns. Often drop-downs where you can use the ALT-Key or dragging to select one or more items. Basically the same as in your beloved file-explorer and the list view. To archive a select all, usually there is a "select all" checkbox.
earthnailaidos5 hours ago
On iOS you can swipe with two fingers to select multiple rows. One of the more hidden features. Mentioning it to show that we didn’t lose it everywhere.
yokljoaidos4 hours ago
Blender does this. It's sick.
jfengelaidos3 hours ago
I don't know when I would use that. If that's something a user would do often I probably want some other design component.

In part it's because I don't like check boxes. They don't have great feedback about what's going to happen. If I designed a UI where someone is likely to check a lot of boxes, I would feel I had done something very wrong.

Sometimes it's unavoidable and so the framework might as well allow it. And as a user, designers often do things I wouldn't have. But I can say I don't miss having that feature.

mewpmewp2jfengel3 hours ago
Maybe when you have e.g. a list of items/pictures/datasets you want to select to perform some action with, e.g. download, export, or perform some bulk job on?
jfengelmewpmewp2an hour ago
With pictures I'd rather use select features: draw a box, shift click, etc.

File choosers usually do something like that, rather than a separate check box component. You select the icon rather than a check box near the icon, so it's slightly clearer what it is you want operated on.

Ideally you'd find other ways to narrow the list. A long list of items is a UX disaster waiting to happen. The more you can categorize your data beforehand, the better off you are. If you can make it all-or-nothing, you're less likely to mis-click.

paradox460jfengel15 minutes ago
I really wish more file choosers would adopt both. Checkboxes are good for making complex, discrete selections that persist through accidental clicks. I can't tell you the number of times I've made a discrete selection of several items, only to lose it because the click misregisters on background instead of the icon
teddyh7 hours ago
ISTR a discussion in Tog on Interface on the design choices available, with visual examples. This seems to indicate that the choice was made there.
RodgerTheGreatteddyh4 hours ago
You're thinking of a discussion about a hypothetical variant of the radio button, a "one or more" UI element. Discussion here on Lobste.rs:

https://lobste.rs/s/v6mkz6/implementing_one_more_ui_component

exiguus6 hours ago
When I see UI radio buttons, I often think about old radios, dishwashers, or washing machines, where you had two or three buttons aligned, and when you press one, the other(s) pop up (if they are already down).
Waterluvianexiguus6 hours ago
That’s precisely the metaphor. A radio as in the radio station presets in your car.
adolphWaterluvianan hour ago
iirc, radio buttons were an early form of bookmark in that one would rotate the tuner whose position was annotated by a scale marker, and when the radio was tuned as desired, one would pull the radio button, then push it in to set that button to that tuning. I have a memory of the tactile sensation in my fingers.
nkriscexiguus5 hours ago
That is why they are called "radio buttons".
smallstepformanexiguus5 hours ago
I actually had a radio with circular radio buttons, which would pop back when you selected another option. It had switches instead of check boxes.

The one that drives me crazy is slider based checkboxes. I never know which side is on/off. Bad UI convention.

And speaking of checkboxes, I want an actual tick mark (checkmark), not a X cross. Its called checkbox, not Xbox or crossbox, it has to be a checkmark. Also, its a square, not a box. Disaster.

Tmpodsmallstepforman4 hours ago
You mean those toggles that are very common on settings pages (i.e. in Android/iOS)? If they are colored, they are very easy to parse, imo, but it never hurts to actually write "on"/"off".

Those toggles actually mimic real hardware that used to be fairly common. I find those should be preferred over checkboxes for anything that takes immediate effect. If they don't, and you're collecting a bunch of options at once, in a form, then use checkboxes.

hedoraTmpod3 hours ago
Unlabeled slider switches were never particularly common.

For instance, my old stereo has push button toggles, where “in” means “on” (this convention was common because of how those switches work), and three way levers with labels on two of the three positions (there’s no space to label the middle position, and it means “default”.

cenamusTmpoda minute ago
Often enough they are on some websites settings, with (almost) no color, but labelled with imperatives. Option X: "activate". Do I press to activate, or is it already on?
oneeyedpigeonexiguus4 hours ago
Our first TV was like this too - before remote controls.
fainpulexiguus4 hours ago
And those buttons needed to be round, because you could turn them to tune the radio or TV to a station. Pressing the button would then "snap" the tuner back to the preset position of the pressed button.
myself248fainpul4 hours ago
No they didn't. My first car had a Blaupunkt radio with buttons that worked like that, but they were rectangular.
hedoramyself2483 hours ago
I think turning the tuning knob typically popped out the preset button, and holding the button down while turning the tuning knob changed the preset. I think this could be done with a loop of string (to control where the dial arrow was) and few springs and catches (to pull the string into position when the button was pressed).

I can’t imagine how the mechanism would work if each preset knob was a tuning knob.

discostringsexiguus3 hours ago
Push button light switches that had two circular buttons with this behavior also used to be extremely common.
1oooqooq6 hours ago
damn. stack overflow is gone for me. constantly logging me out (6 digits imaginary points) and showing me cloudflare annoyance almost every request. i guess i will just ask AIs trained on their content in the end.
Tmpod1oooqooq4 hours ago
Yeah, it has been prompting me with CF CAPTCHAS almost every time lately. Didn't use to do that, a few months ago.
hedoraTmpod3 hours ago
Ouch. Can confirm.

Some paid services I’ve used for years have started aggressively automatically logging me out while I’m driving (eg when using the CarPlay app, which doesn’t include a login screen).

I really wonder what the PM’s are thinking.

rrr_oh_manhedora3 hours ago
> I really wonder what the PM’s are thinking.

Increase number of app downloads

pavlov4 hours ago
My hunch is that the square vs. circle convention is derived from paper forms.

The checkbox has been a common design element in forms for a long time. But people can of course tick off all boxes.

So when form designers needed to emphasize that you should only select one option, they often used a group of non-boxed options together with instruction copy that read “Circle one” (or similar).

The name “radio button” of course comes from physical buttons, but those were often square. So I think the specific circular shape is actually derived from circling an option on paper.

true_religionpavlov4 hours ago
I had once thought the circle shape came from scantron style examination papers, where you can only fill one circle at a time. It’s similar even if the origins are probably different.
mystified5016pavlov17 minutes ago
Radio buttons were also often round. The age of radio (and phenolics) was full of over-inflated round shapes.

But also, when you have a dozen monochromatic pixels to work with, 'square' and 'round' are pretty much the only usefully distinct shapes. Checkboxes were square for obvious reasons, so to distinguish a similar set of controls, you pretty much have to use a circle.

I'm pretty sure these concepts moved directly from physical systems to digital ones. Every person alive then knew what an empty square next to a line of text meant, and everyone understood the concept of ganged push-buttons. Just map it onto a pixel grid and you're good to go

qingcharles2 hours ago
iOS has a history of using round checkboxes to muddy the waters:

https://ux.stackexchange.com/questions/116712/apples-round-checkboxes-where-and-when-are-they-used

(they're not the only offenders in this monstrosity)

vinceguidryan hour ago
I would think actual radios.