Live data from Hacker News

Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

tibinotes.com

101–110 of 190 posts

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#101
post #29

To me, peak usability was 25 years ago, when most applications had a toolbar and a menu that followed a standard pattern. If you're a frequent, non-power-user, you use the toolbar (e.g. "insert row" button). If you're an infrequent non-power-user, you go through the menu (Insert > Row Above). If you're a power user, you remember the shortcuts indicated through underlined letters in menu labels (e.g. Alt, I, A). If yo…

I desperately miss keyboard mnemonics.

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#102

Or, just hire a good UX designer. Seriously, nobody would think about "practical coding for startups surviving without a programmer. " ( ) Well, with AI coding... who knows...

...or designers could just learn some HTML/CSS/JS instead of using half-measures like Figma that need a FE developer handoff step.

See how that works?

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#103
post #53
post #29

To me, peak usability was 25 years ago, when most applications had a toolbar and a menu that followed a standard pattern. If you're a frequent, non-power-user, you use the toolbar (e.g. "insert row" button). If you're an infrequent non-power-user, you go through the menu (Insert > Row Above). If you're a power user, you remember the shortcuts indicated through underlined letters in menu labels (e.g. Alt, I, A). If yo…

The root cause is that web browsers were designed for document delivery but are used for building application UIs. The browsers don’t offer a standard set of common application UI components, so every team builds their own leading to inconsistency and half baked implementations. In contrast, when you build a native app, developers can draw on a standard set of OS provided UI widgets.

There's more consistency in UIs on the web than desktop IMO

People have less power on the web so it has more limitations, even if it lacks a number of consistent UI components baked in.Desktop apps are notorious for getting fancy. Even simple control apps from random headphones/keyboards/music gear/etc all want to reinvent the settings page and make it 'sleek' instead of usable.

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#104
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the most expensive pieces of software around is a Bloomberg Terminal, with base price starting at 20k/yr/license, plus more for extra data. And the UI, when you first use it, is beyond clunky. It looks seriously like a piece of stone age technology, adapted from clay tablets. Even the styling is like 80s films about edgy hackers and their punch cards. Except when you talk to the grey hairs, you realize that UI…

Speaking as someone who has never used it but has spent some time researching it, the Bloomberg Terminal constantly undergoes UI changes, though not in a dramatic way. It's obvious if you look at screenshots throughout the time (it even had some gradients!). It has had its own "rewrites in Svelte", transitioning from a custom renderer to HTML/JavaScript. But you're correct - they don't mess with it, they slightly and…

> the Bloomberg Terminal constantly undergoes UI changes, though not in a dramatic way

This is correct. (Source: I worked on Bloomberg's UI change management policies.)

Despite dismissive comments from design industry folks and more modern-looking competitors, the folks who ran Bloomberg's UX team maintained a focus on customer needs and user research. There are even a few cases where function teams went back and re-implemented old "bugs" after a rewrite (e.g. in the MSG editor) because users had adapted to the old behavior. (Thankfully nothing as bad as spacebar heating https://xkcd.com/1172 though)

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#105
post #29

To me, peak usability was 25 years ago, when most applications had a toolbar and a menu that followed a standard pattern. If you're a frequent, non-power-user, you use the toolbar (e.g. "insert row" button). If you're an infrequent non-power-user, you go through the menu (Insert > Row Above). If you're a power user, you remember the shortcuts indicated through underlined letters in menu labels (e.g. Alt, I, A). If yo…

those menus started to slip a long time ago. they got larger, less organized, and got lazier about mentioning the keyboard shortcut. the new MS paint does a good blend of that style and a newer look

the current text editor trend of having a "command palette" is pretty nice. it's got a hard job to do, with the sheer number of commands and extensibility to add more, but search is pretty good for discoverability (as long as people name/tag/describe the commands well)

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#106
post #99

That was a lot of words to say "Jakob's Law"[0] "Users spend most of their time on other sites. This means that users prefer your site to work the same way as all the other sites they already know." "1. Users will transfer expectations they have built around one familiar product to another that appears similar." "2. By leveraging existing mental models, we can create superior user experiences in which the users can f…

There's an enormous difference between HCI and UX. HCI relates to computer usability for general use cases. A CAD program is there to help you get tasks done, not waste your time, so must follow general HCI principles. UX is watered down HCI that takes business considerations into account. Think about how Microsoft jams a Copilot button into everything, all the way down to the blinking cursor. That doesn't help users…

    > The UX of Facebook is a huge mess, a never-ending, non-chronological scroll of dopamine slot machines.
This is not really relevant to the discussion of the content of the post: "do what others are doing, do what your users are already used to doing"

Whether Facebook's content is good or bad is not really relevant; the UX of FB, Twitter, LinkedIn, and almost every other social media app is remarkably similar in layout and function.

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#107

Here’s some typical reasons why a startup can fail: 1) it failed to communicate and market it’s product 2) it’s product didn’t fit the user’s needs 3) it’s technology strategy made development too expensive 4) it’s product technical quality was too low 5) it’s product did not look appealing to potential new users Developers are responsible for 3 and 4, sales and marketing for 1 and finally designers for 2 and 5. With…

My most successful client (a company I have ownership in, now) has another slot besides marketing, design and code. That is our point person for filtering, testing and verifying user experience issues. Putting a single point person in charge of that onslaught of emails, who fully understands the software, and having them run a full time bug reporting/feature request channel, I think, is indispensible. They advocate o…

[deleted]

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#108
post #29

To me, peak usability was 25 years ago, when most applications had a toolbar and a menu that followed a standard pattern. If you're a frequent, non-power-user, you use the toolbar (e.g. "insert row" button). If you're an infrequent non-power-user, you go through the menu (Insert > Row Above). If you're a power user, you remember the shortcuts indicated through underlined letters in menu labels (e.g. Alt, I, A). If yo…

Good old times :) I miss F1 help, which was usually very good and contextual. On a Settings dialog? Press F1 to view help just for that dialog - offline, instant.

For me, Norton Commander specifically, among other TUIs, was very influential in shaping my keyboard shortcut preferences. I used to rely heavily on Function keys; both for lightning fast file management, and also for code navigation and debugging.

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#109
My startup is a non-standard domain targeting the iPad.

Our need for a designer with functional knowledge and creativity is very high.

I’ve muddled through with iterative designs of my own, but this challenge has delayed our beta.

Designers don’t work for equity where nearly every other kind of talent will.

This is a real blocker for startups.

Re: Practical UX for startups surviving without a designer

#110

Here’s some typical reasons why a startup can fail: 1) it failed to communicate and market it’s product 2) it’s product didn’t fit the user’s needs 3) it’s technology strategy made development too expensive 4) it’s product technical quality was too low 5) it’s product did not look appealing to potential new users Developers are responsible for 3 and 4, sales and marketing for 1 and finally designers for 2 and 5. With…

My most successful client (a company I have ownership in, now) has another slot besides marketing, design and code. That is our point person for filtering, testing and verifying user experience issues. Putting a single point person in charge of that onslaught of emails, who fully understands the software, and having them run a full time bug reporting/feature request channel, I think, is indispensible. They advocate o…

True. When the complexity of the software causes lot of usability issues in ”edge cases”, these technically capable customer connected people are really worth it.

I’ve also seen good things coming from hiring actual ex-users from potential customers that were using competitor’s products. They’d do user training, customer software configuration and development team support. Sometimes even full time.

-

But these people are good day-to-day at ironing out the details. Maybe even discovering underlying dissatisfaction with the product.

But the startup’s constant worry should be what else software is being used, how to be relevant in the future. Maybe through cutting costs in the process by co-designing new workflows to eliminate current tasks.

Executives at the client may be more intrested in finding ways to eliminate all the staff with automation in the process rather than optimizing their tools.

You’re not getting that input from the people working on the tasks now.

Post reply on HN