Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
1–10 of 196 posts
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#2Perhaps removing a pricing scheme so complicated that it literally can't be modelled usefully by the customer would be even better?
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#3One could argue this is exactly the prescription that the Gnome project embraced. Remove, simplify, excise. To mixed reviews.
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#4i think of this lesson often (i don't remember who told me) elon building something at spacex and ruthlessly cutting out pieces they initially thought were needed. less complexity meant cheaper and faster construction so = more tests.
i use this in day to day to life: making plans, buying things, managing others - reducing has led to more accomplished.
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#5This is a beautifully designed blog interface. It’s one of the best I’ve seen, making it a pleasure to read.
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#6One could argue this is exactly the prescription that the Gnome project embraced. Remove, simplify, excise. To mixed reviews.
I believe the quote is to "Make things as simple as possible, but no simpler".
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#7Perhaps removing a pricing scheme so complicated that it literally can't be modelled usefully by the customer would be even better?
The article states that the biggest factor was user misunderstanding of the options, not so much the number of different options. In other words, if they offer option A at $x and option B at 10*$x, if most users mistakenly think they need option B, the calculator is misleading.
Also, I'm a big fan of "contact us for pricing." It's annoying for users who are window-shopping and want a quickie ballpark, but it helps you identify cases where standard pricing (or pricing which can't easily be described online) can be negotiated, and which the user would have otherwise overlooked. This doesn't work for things like most ecommerce, of course.
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#8Perhaps removing a pricing scheme so complicated that it literally can't be modelled usefully by the customer would be even better?
The article states that the biggest factor was user misunderstanding of the options, not so much the number of different options. In other words, if they offer option A at $x and option B at 10*$x, if most users mistakenly think they need option B, the calculator is misleading. Also, I'm a big fan of "contact us for pricing." It's annoying for users who are window-shopping and want a quickie ballpark, but it helps yo…
Many users will see "contact us for pricing" and assume that means you can't afford it. That's fine if your customers are enterprises but definitely not for consumer products that middle class people might actually buy.
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#9Perhaps removing a pricing scheme so complicated that it literally can't be modelled usefully by the customer would be even better?
The article states that the biggest factor was user misunderstanding of the options, not so much the number of different options. In other words, if they offer option A at $x and option B at 10*$x, if most users mistakenly think they need option B, the calculator is misleading. Also, I'm a big fan of "contact us for pricing." It's annoying for users who are window-shopping and want a quickie ballpark, but it helps yo…
>>> I'm a big fan of "contact us for pricing." I have opposite feeling about them. They are like open invitation to give the sales guy a window of opportunity to look up your company website, and markup the price accordingly.
Re: Removing stuff is never obvious yet often better
#10> Except for one person, it never occurred to this very smart group of people that removing the source of confusion could be a good option.
Reminds me of the quote: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."
That applies to us as software engineers too, our salary depends on having projects to write code for so it's not so surprising that a very smart group of people don't often consider that doing nothing or removing something is a valid solution. I like the author's observation on this too: it would be nice if removing things were rewarded. I wonder of the employee who questioned the calculator's necessity got any reward.