Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UX Myths (2014)

uxmyths.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 78 posts

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#41

Post by kristopolous »

HillRat wrote: post #38
kristopolous wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think it's the opposite. I've met many high-falutin designers who seem to care more about an abstract vision and theory then practical terms. I've seen designers coddled and defended against avalanches of negative feedback under dubious auspices that users don't know what they want or that it's a natural thing to complain... I envision whenever I see these redesigns that there's some Im-so-smart person on…

I've seen designers coddled and defended against avalanches of negative feedback under dubious auspices that users don't know what they want or that it's a natural thing to complain... Then those aren't designers, those are artists . Artists have the option of creating a singular vision and defending it against all comers. Designers have to create a vision that matches the discovered desires of the users, and then ru…

I'm not a big fan of assigning identities to others. I've got disagreements on the culture.

If we didn't have this current culture and the older style continued, this mobile phone would have a physical slide out keyboard.

There may have been a physical scroll wheel on the side of the phone that could go through programs, scroll this page And do volume - not just that.

Maybe even buttons on the back of the phone like on the PlayStation controller to take selfies, dim the screen... If the phone was dropped, the replaceable industry standard battery would eject to absorb the impact. Cracked screens would be even more rare on top of that because the device would be a durable absorbent plastic.

The interface itself would have global text and keyword search, the color scheme would change at night, There'd be an sd slot and a dual band gsm/cdma chip etc...

I look at the trajectory we are currently on and I'm envisioning everything to be a toddlers interface in 10 years that's enormously infuriating and useless where you're cattle prodded into doing some very precisely planned flows with intentionally no room for deviation.

Nothing stupid is off the table. Replace the url input box in a web browser with a "share" button to post it on Facebook or Twitter? Google nagging you about new results to some random search from last week? News sites using third party cookies to only present articles on the front page that agree with your biases? A merging of sms and email so you have no idea how things are being sent?

I can see these happening in the Name of Design.

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#42

Post by extra88 »

harryf wrote: post #6

Hmmm take issue with this one - http://uxmyths.com/post/99302792550/myth-33-mobile-users-are... A key point in mobile app UX is being transactional. If you require any input from a user such as a signup form, design it in such a way that it can be done as quickly as possible e.g. in under 60 seconds. That's because that's how long you have until they are distracted by something more interesting. That would mean not a…

If you read the page about the myth, I think the main takeaway is not "mobile users aren't distracted" it's "mobile users are no more distracted than non-mobile users." Therefore, don't require any user in any context to provide 50 data points all at once; design a signup form that can be completed in under 60 seconds regardless of device.

The secondary takeaway is mobile users are more likely to be at home or work than roaming around. I'm not sure what affect that has on UX, maybe as counter to the above, giving users the option to put more time in to a task and/or do one that's more complex.

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#43

Post by [deleted] »

harryf wrote: post #6

Hmmm take issue with this one - http://uxmyths.com/post/99302792550/myth-33-mobile-users-are... A key point in mobile app UX is being transactional. If you require any input from a user such as a signup form, design it in such a way that it can be done as quickly as possible e.g. in under 60 seconds. That's because that's how long you have until they are distracted by something more interesting. That would mean not a…

[deleted]

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#44

Post by CM30 »

kristopolous wrote: post #4

I'll take serious issue with #12. There's undirected scatterbrained interfaces and that's bad sure. But there's the other extreme. Like in Google mobile search, you can't do custom date ranges... they've removed one menu item just on mobile. On SoundCloud mobile you can't delete your own uploads. On reddit mobile you can only do text posts. Or that new version of gas buddy or Google maps or in Google photos on mobile…

Agreed.

And another good example are the horrible 'mobile' styles for forum scripts and wikis.

Look at the SMF one for example. Or the similar one used on Proboards. On mobile devices, you literally can't tell simple stats like what topics have been recently posted in, which members are online or what the last post was in a section. In other words, all the basic things that make a community usable.

But hey, it looks clean, right?

Media Wiki is even worse. On mobile, you can't see any talk page links, any edit histories or any category lists/infoboxes for articles. So if you don't want to search everything or follow random links in articles, then you have no simple way to browse the site or keep up with what's going on in the community.

Taking away useful information and features like this doesn't make the site easier to use, it makes it more annoying. It makes it simpler for random 'guests' while making it more difficult for anyone who actually uses a site or service on a regular basis.

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#45

Post by ldjb »

barrkel wrote: post #33
bbx wrote: post #19

I wish more websites, especially those actively writing about UX, would style visited links differently. When you're reading one of these myths, there is no link to go to the next one ; you need to go back to the index. But since visited links are not differentiated, it's difficult to know which item you've just read, and where to go next. Just using "a:link" instead would yield a more satisfying design: http://i.img…

I didn't know they were links until I read this comment! No hover on mobile.

I'm not too sure what the solution is. You could make the links blue and/or underline them, but that could harm readability and aesthetics.

I suppose some sort of icon (like an arrowhead) next to each link could help them to afford clicking.

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#46

Post by userbinator »

scrollaway wrote: post #36
twoshedsmcginty wrote: post #9

Agree with so much of this, but definitely not with #28. White space has become a design curse. I know how to manage information; I'm not bewildered if I see a lot of it in one place, and I don't need to be guided through it. And I'm truly tired of clicking ellipses to 'see more' Just load the damn page, load the damn comments and paginate. Abandoned Gawker for this reason long ago.

White space is super important. It can serve as a delimiter between pieces of your UI for example. It can serve as an emphasis on content or an important UI element. It has a ton of different uses you are completely disregarding... because > I know how to manage information But you really don't, though. If I replied with a 20 lines efficiently-packed wall of text with no paragraphs or linebreaks, you'd complain. If y…

It can serve as a delimiter between pieces of your UI for example.

If you want a delimiter then use a delimiter, perhaps a line? One of my main gripes with "modern" UI are UI elements which have no defined border on them. For example, how do I know where's the border between two buttons, or whether there's any inactive space between them, when I see only text separated by whitespace (or for that matter, whether they're buttons at all or just text labels, which I argue should have no border)? It's quite disorienting.

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#47

Post by userbinator »

ldjb wrote: post #45
barrkel wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know they were links until I read this comment! No hover on mobile.

I'm not too sure what the solution is. You could make the links blue and/or underline them, but that could harm readability and aesthetics. I suppose some sort of icon (like an arrowhead) next to each link could help them to afford clicking.

You could make the links blue and/or underline them, but that could harm readability and aesthetics.

I doubt it, blue and underlined is pretty much a standard. I think it looks perfectly fine and clear. There's a reason most browsers' default stylesheet will make links look like that.

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#48

Post by paulryanrogers »

CM30 wrote: post #44
kristopolous wrote: post #4

I'll take serious issue with #12. There's undirected scatterbrained interfaces and that's bad sure. But there's the other extreme. Like in Google mobile search, you can't do custom date ranges... they've removed one menu item just on mobile. On SoundCloud mobile you can't delete your own uploads. On reddit mobile you can only do text posts. Or that new version of gas buddy or Google maps or in Google photos on mobile…

Agreed. And another good example are the horrible 'mobile' styles for forum scripts and wikis. Look at the SMF one for example. Or the similar one used on Proboards. On mobile devices, you literally can't tell simple stats like what topics have been recently posted in, which members are online or what the last post was in a section. In other words, all the basic things that make a community usable. But hey, it looks…

Ideally these extra features could be put at the bottom or tucked away under menus. But I think the assumption is that power users have a desktop.

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#49

Post by pbhjpbhj »

ldjb wrote: post #45
barrkel wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't know they were links until I read this comment! No hover on mobile.

I'm not too sure what the solution is. You could make the links blue and/or underline them, but that could harm readability and aesthetics. I suppose some sort of icon (like an arrowhead) next to each link could help them to afford clicking.

A little chain-link icon [similar to the infinity symbol] used to be used on many sites (a while back) to emphasis the presence of a link.

Re: UX Myths (2014)

#50

Post by TeMPOraL »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #48
CM30 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. And another good example are the horrible 'mobile' styles for forum scripts and wikis. Look at the SMF one for example. Or the similar one used on Proboards. On mobile devices, you literally can't tell simple stats like what topics have been recently posted in, which members are online or what the last post was in a section. In other words, all the basic things that make a community usable. But hey, it looks…

Ideally these extra features could be put at the bottom or tucked away under menus. But I think the assumption is that power users have a desktop.

> But I think the assumption is that power users have a desktop.

Which would also be an assumption that power users don't want to do things on the move using their smartphones. Sounds like a pretty bad assumption to me.

Post reply on HN