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

MDN Redesign

hacks.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 159 posts

Re: MDN Redesign

#21

Post by hutzlibu »

Vinnl wrote: post #19
StanAngeloff wrote: post #6

> In mid-2021 we started to think about modernizing MDN’s design [..] with an emphasis on improved navigability and a universal look and feel across all our pages. > > A new logo, chosen by our community [..] We worked closely with branding specialist Luc Doucedame Wait, this sounds like redesign for redesign's sake? > Coming soon: MDN Plus [..] In the coming months, we’ll be expanding MDN to include a premium subscr…

I mean, dark mode alone is somewhat a redesign for redesign's sake that is nevertheless bound to please many of MDN's audience.

No, darkmode is not redesign for redesigns sake - it brings benefit for its users.

But redesign for "modernisation" sounds like doing it for the sake of it, unless people would benefit somehow from improved UX. Modernisation alone does not tell this however, I would expect slick awesome buttons, but some ugly, but important buttons gone.

Re: MDN Redesign

#22

Post by micromacrofoot »

StanAngeloff wrote: post #6

> In mid-2021 we started to think about modernizing MDN’s design [..] with an emphasis on improved navigability and a universal look and feel across all our pages. > > A new logo, chosen by our community [..] We worked closely with branding specialist Luc Doucedame Wait, this sounds like redesign for redesign's sake? > Coming soon: MDN Plus [..] In the coming months, we’ll be expanding MDN to include a premium subscr…

An outrageously good resource really, I use it almost every day! Very happy to pay for it.

Re: MDN Redesign

#23

Post by Vinnl »

hutzlibu wrote: post #21
Vinnl wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, dark mode alone is somewhat a redesign for redesign's sake that is nevertheless bound to please many of MDN's audience.

No, darkmode is not redesign for redesigns sake - it brings benefit for its users. But redesign for "modernisation" sounds like doing it for the sake of it, unless people would benefit somehow from improved UX. Modernisation alone does not tell this however, I would expect slick awesome buttons, but some ugly, but important buttons gone.

Well, in that case it's not a redesign for redesign's sake regardless of how it sounds, because they added a dark mode now :)

Re: MDN Redesign

#24

Post by apocalyptic0n3 »

I actually dislike the change to the Compatibility Chart. The checkmark serves the same purpose as green vs red boxes did (and is frankly less readable at a glance, not more) and being able to quickly see relative times features were added at a glance made it easy to evaluate whether to use a feature or not. Guess I'll have to revert to using Can I Use? for this again. I had mostly replaced that with MDN.

Re: MDN Redesign

#25

Post by andruc »

hutzlibu wrote: post #21
Vinnl wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, dark mode alone is somewhat a redesign for redesign's sake that is nevertheless bound to please many of MDN's audience.

No, darkmode is not redesign for redesigns sake - it brings benefit for its users. But redesign for "modernisation" sounds like doing it for the sake of it, unless people would benefit somehow from improved UX. Modernisation alone does not tell this however, I would expect slick awesome buttons, but some ugly, but important buttons gone.

What about for "improved navigability" then?

Re: MDN Redesign

#26

Post by tshaddox »

hutzlibu wrote: post #21
Vinnl wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, dark mode alone is somewhat a redesign for redesign's sake that is nevertheless bound to please many of MDN's audience.

No, darkmode is not redesign for redesigns sake - it brings benefit for its users. But redesign for "modernisation" sounds like doing it for the sake of it, unless people would benefit somehow from improved UX. Modernisation alone does not tell this however, I would expect slick awesome buttons, but some ugly, but important buttons gone.

What is “redesign for redesign’s sake” even supposed to mean then? It’s pretty obvious that they think visitors will like the new design.

Re: MDN Redesign

#27

Post by pdenton »

I'll just use zeal from now on and never update it. It was fine earlier today, but now it's awful. There was nothing wrong with the old design.

Re: MDN Redesign

#29

Post by hellomyguys »

hutzlibu wrote: post #21
Vinnl wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, dark mode alone is somewhat a redesign for redesign's sake that is nevertheless bound to please many of MDN's audience.

No, darkmode is not redesign for redesigns sake - it brings benefit for its users. But redesign for "modernisation" sounds like doing it for the sake of it, unless people would benefit somehow from improved UX. Modernisation alone does not tell this however, I would expect slick awesome buttons, but some ugly, but important buttons gone.

It's pretty explicitly stated that they think a benefit of the redesign is improved UX.

Re: MDN Redesign

#30

Post by romellem »

Change is hard, naturally there will be some inherent backlash, but one thing I think is a step backwards is the Browser Compatibility table at the bottom. Previously, it had the browser version inline for the cell, now it is just a check mark. To see what version, you need to click on the cell to expand some "more info" section at the bottom.

Knowing if a feature was very recently supported or has been supported for a while is useful; now I'll need to drill down to see the information, and comparing that info across the browsers will be more difficult.

Post reply on HN