Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd also note that despite Jakob Nielsen's prominence nobody designs like he suggests. We should be open to the idea that beauty and delight may be more important than usability or features.
Respectfully, fuck that. Beauty matters the first time you use it, whereas functionality matters every single time. Or, in business terms, beauty has terrible ROI.
Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
231–240 of 245 posts
Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#232Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Design is how it works, not how it looks. After over a decade of people jumping into these discussions with this line, I’ve gotta push back: Design is also how things look, and how things look can be important. Consumers care about how things look. If we dismiss presentation and drive people towards UX stuff every time it comes up, then the people we talk to are going to end up having good ideas that no one buys be…
Conversely, A lot of time something looks good "because" it works well. I had one old structural engineer spend a great deal of time trying to convince me that beautiful bridges were stronger than than ugly bridges. because our ideas of beauty are so tied to what works well. I am not entirely convinced, I have seen the sins some of these so called designers do in the name of "looking good" but I do see his point.
Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#233Earlier quoted context omitted.
On that note: you can't even imagine how bad Material UI is https://twitter.com/nikitonsky/status/1645797661684170754?s=... and https://twitter.com/nikitonsky/status/1643613144143519744?s=...
Yo I thought those tweets might be from a few years ago and "they must have resolved those by now"... no, the tweets are literally from TODAY and SIX DAYS AGO. What the hell?! Sad times...
Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#234Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Design is how it works, not how it looks. After over a decade of people jumping into these discussions with this line, I’ve gotta push back: Design is also how things look, and how things look can be important. Consumers care about how things look. If we dismiss presentation and drive people towards UX stuff every time it comes up, then the people we talk to are going to end up having good ideas that no one buys be…
I'd also note that despite Jakob Nielsen's prominence nobody designs like he suggests. We should be open to the idea that beauty and delight may be more important than usability or features.
Oh, please no. We already have more than enough of that line of thinking. In software, especially, we see far too much pretty stuff that is horrendous to actually use.
I'll take the ugly thing that makes my life easier over the pretty thing that does the opposite every single time.
Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#235Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you’re selling a premium produce, then beauty can be justified by the premium price. But us should never be more important than the functionality. Never. Even a Rolls Royce is a vehicle (and a damned fine one to boot) before it’s an art piece.
Depends what product. A toaster has very similar functionality to its competitors, so it needs to attract buyers with style and design elements. When functionality is a given like it is for a kitchen toaster, we can argue the presentation and style is more important.
Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#236Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#237Earlier quoted context omitted.
This reminds me of expert systems where use is so intense that discoverability is trumped by speed of input. Old DOS/ASCII based retail systems were often optimized for speed.
The data entry speed on an old fashioned cash register, compared to a modern pos of a pos is insane. It feels like a variation of learned helplessness, watching someone fumble with a Stripe terminal.
Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#238Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, this one is non-obvious: > Label text should be placed within the bounds of the text field box And I'm perfectly fine with Google spending unreasonable amounts of their money so I can learn lightly-valuable facts like this... As long as people don't mass adopt their findings before they get repeated.
This one, I think, is them just not willing to admit their mistake. I wouldn't be surprised if the experiment went like this: "Here are the inputs with only underline. In one of them the label is inside the input". In this case sure, users will better understand it's an input if the label is inside.
I would still hold to the obvious (label above or left of the widget) until it is replicated, as the study isn't of very high quality.
Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#239Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wish more businesses would treat beauty as a function of a product just like all other “actual” functions of it, a valid part of the whole package. I know it won’t probably happen anytime soon, because “ROI when???”, just been thinking about it a lot after reading Beauty by Sagmeister and Walsh.
How much of a premium are you, as a customer, willing to pay for the beauty? How much functionality will you give up for the shinies?
Working all day in ugly software is like a mini version of this.
I don't think anybody considers beautiful software ad a premium, more that ugly software will not be considered at all because it can't be trusted.
Re: Rules for developers to design beautiful UIs without a designer
#240Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. Yes, they should. A person who does UI and doesn't have first-hand experience on what customers want and do is not a UI designer. That person is a dribbble illustrator.
I remember clearly the first time I ever heard the term “UX”. It was condescending explained by some guy from Google to a quite technical audience of telcos, many years ago. For reasons I couldn’t explain, it pissed me off. Later, they produced Material Design. The prosecution rests, your honour.