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

Laws of UX

lawsofux.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 217 posts

Re: Laws of UX

#81

Post by cptskippy »

platz wrote: post #68
boomlinde wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I clicked on one of the book covers and ended up with an abstract full screen animation that ran for five seconds before I figured out it was a full screen page header. I'm confident that web design is the way it is mostly as a means to keep the people that work with it employed. A simple, straight forward implementation with a little color and layout to make it stand out would have been much easier to navigate and d…

It also creates differentiation in a competitive world.

Different doesn't equal better.

Re: Laws of UX

#82

Post by culot »

boomlinde wrote: post #66
ComputerGuru wrote: post #44

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…

I clicked on one of the book covers and ended up with an abstract full screen animation that ran for five seconds before I figured out it was a full screen page header. I'm confident that web design is the way it is mostly as a means to keep the people that work with it employed. A simple, straight forward implementation with a little color and layout to make it stand out would have been much easier to navigate and d…

Even on the desktop site it hides the navigation. It could use an index on the left -- not to mention that the entire law page is so brief that it does not need its own page.

Which one of those laws tackle UX bloat and ornament for ornaments sake?

The site is pretty, that's true, but it's not made to be a useful source of information, it's made to be pretty above all else. The entire site is a great example of what to do if you want to make information minimally accessible and create a vapid slideshow.

Re: Laws of UX

#83

Post by cptskippy »

have_faith wrote: post #70

Did anyone else enjoy it for what it was? I get the criticisms, you want the web to be homogenised and free from any form of expression that doesn't present every piece of information in it's most human-machine digestible form, I get it. But it was pretty simple to use and the flair was minimal. I don't understand the pitchforks. There's a few minor annoyances like the back button not working as expected, but they ar…

> I get the criticisms, you want the web to be homogenised and free from any form of expression that doesn't present every piece of information in it's most human-machine digestible form, I get it.

You don't get it, you just minimized and dismissed everyone's objections to this site.

As a power point presentation, this site is great. As a line item on your resume, sure.

As a resource that someone can use and reference, it's awful.

Re: Laws of UX

#84

Post by incyin677 »

boomlinde wrote: post #66
ComputerGuru wrote: post #44

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…

I clicked on one of the book covers and ended up with an abstract full screen animation that ran for five seconds before I figured out it was a full screen page header. I'm confident that web design is the way it is mostly as a means to keep the people that work with it employed. A simple, straight forward implementation with a little color and layout to make it stand out would have been much easier to navigate and d…

You’re not in a minority, IMO

You’re just feeling like saying something here and now

I have similar chats with users and tech nerds

Web design is often gonzo for self-aggrandizement

They seem to forget the layout is more a package for content, which is the real reason to be there

Too often it’s turned INTO the content or blended in along with

And it’s terribly distracting

Basically the web is what you get when college kids who are full of righteousness over their own newly acquired standing think they own the place

I’ve whittled my web life to a dozen usual sites, arxiv, phone apps down to email/PD/chat for work and messenging/cal/email/podcasts for personal

I’m not Luddite, I am tired of tech fetishism. Too much redundancy to track for too little new utilitarian value

Re: Laws of UX

#85

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

have_faith wrote: post #70

Did anyone else enjoy it for what it was? I get the criticisms, you want the web to be homogenised and free from any form of expression that doesn't present every piece of information in it's most human-machine digestible form, I get it. But it was pretty simple to use and the flair was minimal. I don't understand the pitchforks. There's a few minor annoyances like the back button not working as expected, but they ar…

Breaking the back button is not a minor annoyance, it's a major design error. Site size is irrelevant.

Arguably, the rest of the site is also a major design error. Its style over substance approach doesn't look or work like most web sites.

In fact it looks like an excuse to design a set of virtual retro book covers that reference the stylings of the late 1960s and early 1970s.

I have nothing against vintage book covers, but it seems like an unusual choice for a site about modern web design.

Re: Laws of UX

#86

Post by culot »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #71
ComputerGuru wrote: post #44

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…

I was undecided until middle-click opened in current tab. That's not what I asked for. Let my browser do its job. Edit: And right-click behaves like left-click! Non-standard and annoying. So much for "Jakob's Law".

That is an unforgivable sin of web design: do not highjack the open-in-new-tab/new-window keystrokes.

Re: Laws of UX

#88

Post by incyin677 »

platz wrote: post #68
boomlinde wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I clicked on one of the book covers and ended up with an abstract full screen animation that ran for five seconds before I figured out it was a full screen page header. I'm confident that web design is the way it is mostly as a means to keep the people that work with it employed. A simple, straight forward implementation with a little color and layout to make it stand out would have been much easier to navigate and d…

It also creates differentiation in a competitive world.

And here I thought that was what your content was meant to achieve

If you’re selling the same thing as everyone else but your website is more hip, yeah not really a win to get excited about

You’re just hanging onto a trend until the next one

I get it though

Web dev is like home building or couture; Make up new style trends to cash in on a contemporary meme!

Personally...meh

Re: Laws of UX

#89

Post by culot »

have_faith wrote: post #70

Did anyone else enjoy it for what it was? I get the criticisms, you want the web to be homogenised and free from any form of expression that doesn't present every piece of information in it's most human-machine digestible form, I get it. But it was pretty simple to use and the flair was minimal. I don't understand the pitchforks. There's a few minor annoyances like the back button not working as expected, but they ar…

As an art installation, for its visuals and animations? It's nice, I like it. Its problem is that it's trying to peddle information, and doing so in a highly inefficient way.

Re: Laws of UX

#90

Post by vezycash »

yoz-y wrote: post #76

After all the criticism here I took a shot of paraphrasing the website in a page length post: https://yozy.net/2018/01/10-laws-of-ux-digested/ A kind of an opinionated tl;dr

Your interpretation helped me understand most of the laws.

I hope mods replaces yours with the original.

Thanks.

Post reply on HN