41–50 of 217 posts
This should come with the footnote "unless you're Facebook". I wonder if they're fully aware of the power they wield in defining what normal/expected UX looks like to a so many people? (e.g. popularizing the mobile three lines 'hamburger' menu, then later moving away from it themselves)
Something in this direction would be Bootstrap's templates:
https://getbootstrap.com/docs/4.0/examples/
I dunno about you, but I'd rather not have to think about how to make project sites look like every time, but at the same time not necessarily use the same purchased template (because said template may not actually have a good UX).
The fact that there are no standards here is part of the problem, IMO. Novelty drives views and therefore revenue so some sites are incentivized to be overly complex, imo.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems a broad law considering * Expectation is subjective and this forum are the minority * History-jacking done badly is not a reason to throw out a technology Random JavaScript hate is so last year
> Random JavaScript hate is so last year It may well be, and with good reason. However, I still encounter people who think that JavaScript is only used for things like onMouseOver and find it difficult to accept that actually, their favourite app or site is entirely powered by JavaScript.
I am entirely unsure what I’m supposed to click on, if what I’m seeing is an animation or a loading progress bar, the back button gave me a blank, black page, and everything on the site would be better if it were simply static html without all this JavaScript garbage that serves exactly zero functional purpose.
> Jacob's Law: 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. This should come with the footnote "unless you're Facebook". I wonder if they're fully aware of the power they wield in defining what normal/expected UX looks like to a so many people? (e.g. popularizing the mobile three lines 'hamburger' menu, then later…
I mean, even site of huge companies are not necessarily the Facebook of anything, since that’s just not the use case. I would, for example, argue that this law applies perfectly and without any qualifications to Apple’s website which might see a lot of traffic, but it’s not exactly a site users spend most of their times on. (I would also argue that the website people actually do spend most time on exists in a certain context where the outside world will have some influence on how and how efficiently it is perceived and used. Obviously the website people do spend the most time on has a role in forming that context, but so does the web as a whole and every single site.)
Oh, and I do think Facebook is very aware of that fact, but you still have to see that they are always wrestling with the status quo, i.e. for them the law takes the form of “Users spend most of their time on other sites or on the old variant of your site. This means that users prefer your site to work the same way as all the other sites they already know or your site as it was.“
It’s not exactly easy for them, even if they get to be expectation-defining and their power is not absolute. The stakes are high.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seems a broad law considering * Expectation is subjective and this forum are the minority * History-jacking done badly is not a reason to throw out a technology Random JavaScript hate is so last year
> Random JavaScript hate is so last year It may well be, and with good reason. However, I still encounter people who think that JavaScript is only used for things like onMouseOver and find it difficult to accept that actually, their favourite app or site is entirely powered by JavaScript.
For a website all about UX, the site is almost impossible to use (at least on mobile), both from an intuitiveness perspective and from a technical one. I am entirely unsure what I’m supposed to click on, if what I’m seeing is an animation or a loading progress bar, the back button gave me a blank, black page, and everything on the site would be better if it were simply static html without all this JavaScript garbage…
It only feeds you a morsel of information at a time and you have to wait for stupid animation transitions in between. I read two panels then left.
This information could easily have been presented in a normal HTML document.