Live data from Hacker News

UX clichés

uxdesign.cc

131–140 of 172 posts

Re: UX clichés

#131
post #113
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are a lot of interfaces that are suffer from issues with discoverability and understanding, and even when a user figures this stuff out one time (or is showed it), the interface is not memorable. Oh, dear, God, yes. The "hamburger menu" is one of the worst travesties of the modern age.

What's wrong with the hamburger menu? It seems like a good compromise of quickly accessible functionality for little screen real estate. For desktop apps with plenty of screen real estate it's crazy (looking at you gnome) but on mobiles it's fine, especially when the alternatives seem to be some sort of hidden and undiscovered slide out menu or long button press.

It's been proven to be misunderstood globally.

Just the word "menu" is more beneficial.

Re: UX clichés

#132
> "You are not your own user."

Never say this to someone. First, anyone bringing up feedback is doing it for a reason. Weed out what that reason is.

If you say this to someone re-asses your own emotional reason for it. This is a very emotional response.

I've seen people voice interface feedback that was dismissed with this exact response, and 12 months later was implemented. We could have saved 12 months, instead, we had to deal with a designer's emotional immaturity.

Re: UX clichés

#133

I am not a designer nor a software engineer, nor a business person. I am just a (heavy) user of all sorts of software for a very long time. I am a competent coder, and I code for research and pleasure. I don't have a dog in this, let's say, professional race. Every time I spot "UX" in relation to something I use, I cringe. Not because I have anything against the idea of design, or good interfaces, or designing good i…

> DON'T FUCKING CHANGE THE INTERFACE That's why it's important to have good UX people to help you get it mostly right the first time

Or make it so bad that people want it to change. :)

Re: UX clichés

#134
post #50

I like this one: > UX should be a mindset, not a step in the process Mostly because it's not a UX-cliché, but a cliché for everything: security, accessibility, UX, localisation, etc.; advocates want them all to be an essential part of the process, but in practice, nobody manages to do all that.

People who say this, say it because they don't want to commit.

Re: UX clichés

#136
post #113
post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are a lot of interfaces that are suffer from issues with discoverability and understanding, and even when a user figures this stuff out one time (or is showed it), the interface is not memorable. Oh, dear, God, yes. The "hamburger menu" is one of the worst travesties of the modern age.

What's wrong with the hamburger menu? It seems like a good compromise of quickly accessible functionality for little screen real estate. For desktop apps with plenty of screen real estate it's crazy (looking at you gnome) but on mobiles it's fine, especially when the alternatives seem to be some sort of hidden and undiscovered slide out menu or long button press.

The problem is that you have no idea what is under that menu.

The hamburger menu becomes a default dumping ground substituting for an intelligently design UI.

Re: UX clichés

#137
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not true: "The human brain is incredibly plastic and adaptable. Unless the interface is truly absurd, most people can get used to it and never give it a second thought again." I've interviewed and observed enough users to know this is not true. There are a lot of interfaces that are suffer from issues with discoverability and understanding, and even when a user figures this stuff out one time (or is showed it…

No matter how bad the UI is, the user will eventually either, get used to it, or find another way around the problem.

...or use another product with a better UI.

Re: UX clichés

#138
post #119

UX is a by-product of the mess we have made of web development. We made web development so overly complicated that vast teams are needed for the simple task of showing stuff on a page. Part of the holdup has been CSS. To build out a responsive layout used to be phenomenally hard. Tim Berners Lee didn't think layout was needed, originally the web was to just link documents that people would open in other programs, so…

> UX is a by-product of the mess we have made of web development. UX is about much more than web development. It's about the user's experience of any product or service, including software, vacuum cleaners, attending an event etc.

That is a retro-fit of the interpretation.

The phrase 'User Experience' was invented by Norman of the Nielson Norman Group. He had a book to sell and a professional niche to make. That is fine but the consequence is that now we have thousands of other 'Normans' who aren't seem to think they are the most important people on somewhat bloated teams.

Before this Norman chap came along as the god of this new discipline there was some care for the user taught in computer science degrees. It has always been a consideration.

When the vacuum cleaner was invented Mr Hoover didn't think 'I must hire a UX expert for this new hovering hoover (the Constellation model)'. When the Beatles put on a few gigs at the Cavern Club John and Paul were not using the phrase 'user experience' to get the sweat on the walls right (or the lack of alcohol being sold on the premises).

The phrase 'user experience' would have sucked back then for the process of just designing something right, given technical constraints.

A lot of the best design has been done by engineers who didn't need to consult a higher authority before a product could be brought into being. But we remember engineers for what they invent not how they design the user experience. If we go back to the vacuum cleaner example, some aspects of the design relate to manufacturing techniques, so if you know that it is cheaper to drill a series of holes rather than a slot then that defines how you make something like how the adjustment works. Some intimacy is going on there so the design is not an abstract thing devoid of understanding of either the user or the manufacturing.

With this bizarre Norman invented 'user experience' discipline there is a definite disconnect between this aspect of 'manufacturing'. You have got people trying to boss the team around and have people do what they say when they haven't much of a clue on how it works under the hood. Industrial designers who design things like vacuum cleaners are a different breed. They used to use words like 'ergonomics' in their framing of understanding the user.

Human Computer Interaction was what the buzzword used to be. There has always been consideration of the user, but, if you only have a teletype interface then you end up with something that gets the job done first, user experience comes later when an Alan Kay comes along. His trick was to imagine computers were vastly more powerful and design/build for that.

Our current silo-ing off of design into this 'user experience' thing where only self-professed experts are allowed to put the buttons in the right place cuts the 'design is how it works' part of the problem space out, meanwhile it also makes developers able to slack off in this area. We are all human and we can all do 'user experience' (despite lots of design that goes to the contrary).

Re: UX clichés

#139

UX is a by-product of the mess we have made of web development. We made web development so overly complicated that vast teams are needed for the simple task of showing stuff on a page. Part of the holdup has been CSS. To build out a responsive layout used to be phenomenally hard. Tim Berners Lee didn't think layout was needed, originally the web was to just link documents that people would open in other programs, so…

I would try to dissect your rambling pile of nonsense, but I have no idea where to start.

Some people are able to succinctly summarise an idea into a cliche. Some ideas need a little bit more explaining.

I have relatives that are user experience experts, paid very well and they attend lots of meetings all around the world doing very important 'user experience' things. In my own personal experience I have had to endure meetings with people who are user experience experts. From what I have gleaned over the years from how this software development game is going I am okay to declare 'nuanced bullshit' over what 'UX' is about.

How we have got here is not the fault of anyone in particular but it is going to be changing. Already 'user interface designers' are as good as toast, I think that 'user experience' is ripe to be usurped. For starters is does not embrace a 'customer service' ethos, which is a deeper way of looking at 'user experience' and much more to do with putting the customer first rather than some make-believe trendy discipline.

See it that way if you are having difficulties dissecting my earlier nonsense!

Re: UX clichés

#140
post #137
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No matter how bad the UI is, the user will eventually either, get used to it, or find another way around the problem.

...or use another product with a better UI.

This. I may be biased as a designer, but I definitely prefer products with better UI if it performs similarly. I'm a firm believer in no matter how great your product is, always invest in good design.
Post reply on HN