Dangling by a Trivial Feature
prog21.dadgum.com
Dangling by a Trivial Feature
1–10 of 63 posts
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#2That's why you need settings in your tools.
The tool should work efficiently without you ever looking at the settings, but if you need it you should be able to change anything you like.
Not sure it applies to consumer interfaces. Ideally it shouldn't. But for tools that you use to do day-to-day work, absolutely.
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#3That's why you need settings in your tools. The tool should work efficiently without you ever looking at the settings, but if you need it you should be able to change anything you like. Not sure it applies to consumer interfaces. Ideally it shouldn't. But for tools that you use to do day-to-day work, absolutely.
It is also why your settings must be absolutely simple, logical and follow conventions of whatever platform you are on (if any).
If I have to dig through 10 pages of arcane settings to find some "simple thing" like the one described in the OP's example feature, it might as well not exist (assuming the context that I'm a new user and not already committed to using this software), I've already moved on to the next candidate app.
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#4That's why you need settings in your tools. The tool should work efficiently without you ever looking at the settings, but if you need it you should be able to change anything you like. Not sure it applies to consumer interfaces. Ideally it shouldn't. But for tools that you use to do day-to-day work, absolutely.
Settings are for microwaves. Computer-based tools should be reprogrammable. Still, the tool should be easy to configure for the 80% case.
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#5That's why you need settings in your tools. The tool should work efficiently without you ever looking at the settings, but if you need it you should be able to change anything you like. Not sure it applies to consumer interfaces. Ideally it shouldn't. But for tools that you use to do day-to-day work, absolutely.
It is also why your settings must be absolutely simple, logical and follow conventions of whatever platform you are on (if any). If I have to dig through 10 pages of arcane settings to find some "simple thing" like the one described in the OP's example feature, it might as well not exist (assuming the context that I'm a new user and not already committed to using this software), I've already moved on to the next cand…
I doubt there is a wide choice of professional tools in most areas. You have to choose between a few suboptimal fits, and that's where you start valuing flexibility.
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#6That's why you need settings in your tools. The tool should work efficiently without you ever looking at the settings, but if you need it you should be able to change anything you like. Not sure it applies to consumer interfaces. Ideally it shouldn't. But for tools that you use to do day-to-day work, absolutely.
Not sure what "settings" have to do with this. The point being made in the post is that if trivial, "expected" features are missing, users wont even bother to look further.
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#7That's why you need settings in your tools. The tool should work efficiently without you ever looking at the settings, but if you need it you should be able to change anything you like. Not sure it applies to consumer interfaces. Ideally it shouldn't. But for tools that you use to do day-to-day work, absolutely.
Settings are for microwaves. Computer-based tools should be reprogrammable. Still, the tool should be easy to configure for the 80% case.
Settings on a microwave are, I think, a terrible example. Most microwaves I've used are horribly over-encumbered.
I expect two dials on any microwave I use: Time, Power. Maybe a control to set the time, if it has a clock.
I don't disagree with your general point about tools being able to be reprogrammed, though. One of the reasons I loved Autocad as a tool is the Lisp interpreter that allows you to script and extend it. I think that's a perfect example of a professional, mainstream tool with a good API that non-programmers find useful (if only to run scripts they find).
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#8The tricky part is that what some users think of as a must-have trivial-feature, others won't care about at all. Thus getting every trivial-feature for every user becomes a herculean task. (The standard "each user only needs 10% of a program's features... but they all need a /different/ 10%".)
For instance: I don't care about seeing my current cursor coordinates when using an image editor. I probably have some other must-have tiny feature that the author here wouldn't even notice.
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#9The tricky part is that what some users think of as a must-have trivial-feature, others won't care about at all. Thus getting every trivial-feature for every user becomes a herculean task. (The standard "each user only needs 10% of a program's features... but they all need a /different/ 10%".) For instance: I don't care about seeing my current cursor coordinates when using an image editor. I probably have some other…
The author was looking for a vector illustration app, not a photo editor. Vector graphics apps are often used to create diagrams and other semi-technical drawings that require some CAD-like features, the simplest of which is a usable coordinate system.
Re: Dangling by a Trivial Feature
#10As someone who sells software online, the most horrifying thing about this scenario is that the user is very unlikely to ever tell me why they moved on, and so I'm terrifyingly unlikely to ever know that this trivial feature is missing.
This literally keeps me awake at night.
Statistic: it takes roughly 200 non-converting free trial downloads of my software to get one data point of feedback telling me why they decided not to buy.