This isn't exactly right - optimizing the NewsFeed and eliminating exploration may be a more efficient UX in a way, but that doesn't mean it's better. I don't hear "reduced exploration" and think "that's way better". I'm not saying that's why FB made the decision, but Dustin doesn't know why they made it either. I'd have made the same decision as a UX focused CEO though is all I'm saying.
Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
91–100 of 231 posts
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#92It baffles me that businesses such as Facebook seem to be driven so heavily by the numbers. If I were the FB product manager given the choice between a News Feed that is pleasant to use, or one that at times feels actively user-hostile but provides better metrics, I would want to have the freedom to pick user happiness over the bottom line, in no small part because I would (I assume) be one of those users. I can't he…
I suppose Facebook can get away with it as long as the barriers to competition are high enough. If competition was possible then users would presumably use the site with the best interface.
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a subtle distinction to be made here. The argument is that a better user experience was abandoned in favor of a worse user experience that generated more impressions per user. It might be true that users would have an immediately negative reaction to change; I suppose it's impossible to know for sure. But that doesn't mean that the new design wouldn't have been better at providing the functionality that Faceb…
The argument is that a better user experience was abandoned in favor of a worse user experience that generated more impressions per user. The argument is that an experience that Dustin Curtis liked better was a better experience. Maybe the victorious layout really was liked by more people, just as more people clearly like a 4" (or greater) smartphone screen than 3.5".
Not sure, I've seen users kick and scream about change and then after all the fuss dies down they end up loving the product even more then before the change. The trick is knowing when your right. (Example: All smartphones need physical keyboards, Apple was right, how is BlackBerry doing these days?)
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
You make me think of QWERTY keyboards and how they remain the most common format globally in spite of being intentionally designed to be inefficient. Some people seem to believe in an "ideal world" and let that interfere with interacting with actual reality in a practical way. Things need to be backwards compatible with user experience to succeed. New designs sometimes simply are not that.
QWERTY was intentionally designed to be inefficient? I thought it was based on statistics of common letters or something. Care to shed some light?
QWERTY's initial design was for typewriters. To prevent jamming of typebars, commonly used letter pairs were not placed together.
Saying that it was designed to be inefficient is wrong, however it's fair to say that preventing typewriter jams overrode typing efficiency as a design consideration.
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#95Earlier quoted context omitted.
>text links replaced by only graphical icons This is a terribly pernicious trend in all sorts of software, not just GMail. I really hope that the fad dies out soon, because it's preventing me form effectively using software that otherwise may have been great.
> fad You realize that iconography predates all civilization, right?
True, but don't confuse iconography with brand marketing.
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#96It baffles me that businesses such as Facebook seem to be driven so heavily by the numbers. If I were the FB product manager given the choice between a News Feed that is pleasant to use, or one that at times feels actively user-hostile but provides better metrics, I would want to have the freedom to pick user happiness over the bottom line, in no small part because I would (I assume) be one of those users. I can't he…
>>> will deliver its users a worse product for the sake of few more dollars.
When you are operating in FB scale, few more dollars become millions. Repeat 'few more dollars' several times, you have hundreds of millions/billion.
While morally you are correct and that's definitely what a startup should do, when you are large you have managers striving for bonuses, investors keen on getting higher ROI etc. It's not that simple and pure anymore.
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#97I would have much preferred the proposed layout as seen in this photo. In fact, it is (almost scary) similar to the most recent Diaspora single-page view that was just rolled out no more than a year ago. We designed our single-page view to focus on content, and unlike Facebook, we don't care about ad revenue, so we don't have these problems. :)
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#98Nice theory, but I think Dustin's conclusions are wrong. I got to use this alternative design on my second Facebook account that I used for app development, while my personal account didn't have it enabled. I really disliked like the new sidebar design. The concept was similar to what GMail has done lately, with text links replaced by only graphical icons. I found it really difficult to remember what each icon linked…
>text links replaced by only graphical icons This is a terribly pernicious trend in all sorts of software, not just GMail. I really hope that the fad dies out soon, because it's preventing me form effectively using software that otherwise may have been great.
One of the first things I did when Gmail updated the design was to revert back to text links in the settings.
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
>text links replaced by only graphical icons This is a terribly pernicious trend in all sorts of software, not just GMail. I really hope that the fad dies out soon, because it's preventing me form effectively using software that otherwise may have been great.
> fad You realize that iconography predates all civilization, right?
I think he's talking within the context of software, you know.
Even within this context, icons have been used for a long time in things like toolbars. But historically they've been quite descriptive of what they do, and often times have been accompanied by a textual description if there's any uncertainty as to their meaning.
Like the earlier commenter wrote, however, we've seen the use of icons really taken to a stupid extreme as of late. This is especially true when it comes to websites and web apps. The icons are often rather abstract, to the point of causing confusion and harming usability.
Even desktop apps have succumbed to this. Look at Chrome's menu icon. In the last version I used, it was a stack of three horizontal lines. At a glance, it's not clear at all what it represents. It's only after clicking it, and seeing the menu that opens, that the connection is made.
Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do
#100Earlier quoted context omitted.
>text links replaced by only graphical icons This is a terribly pernicious trend in all sorts of software, not just GMail. I really hope that the fad dies out soon, because it's preventing me form effectively using software that otherwise may have been great.
> fad You realize that iconography predates all civilization, right?
Nice selective quoting.
> fad [of replacing text links with icon-only buttons in software UI]