12 ms·

Before hamburger menus became popular, weren't people complaining about the exact opposite problem? That is, if you break out the menu items into more prominent

Before hamburger menus became popular, weren't people complaining about the exact opposite problem? That is, if you break out the menu items into more prominent interface elements (e.g., tab bar items), then you're at risk of cluttering your visual design with less-common functions. As in all things design, I suppose a balance needs to be found, but I personally don't find anything wrong with a hamburger menu per se. Almost everything has or needs something like a hamburger menu somewhere. Can it be abused? Yes. Does that make it inherently bad? I don't think so.

sandofsky 11y ago
You put the most important menu items in a tab bar. If you really, really need the other junk, hide the long tail of menu items in a "more" tab.
- dperfect 11y ago
  I agree that sometimes that works really well. Still, for some apps/websites there is really only one obvious and important function. In those cases, a tab bar would just be putting "the other junk" in a more important place than it should be. There will always be a conflict in design between minimalism and functionality. The hamburger menu just happens to be prime territory upon which that battle is fought.
  - sandofsky 11y ago
    There's always an exception, but your app probably isn't one of them.
    - dperfect 11y ago
      Out of curiosity I just opened up Facebook on my iPhone (mentioned in the article as a good example). The tab bar has 5 items: News Feed, Requests, Messages, Notifications, and More. I'm in the News Feed 99% of the time. Requests and Notifications are pretty much redundant (since requests become notifications) and could easily be put somewhere else - maybe nav/title bar. Messages is completely useless - just shows me a button to install a different app that I don't care about (of course that's "better for metrics", but not better for users). And "More"... well that's a standard hamburger menu, and frankly the only thing that needs to be there in my opinion. Maybe I'm an atypical user, but that experience seems to be the case in a lot of tabbed apps.
      - sandofsky 11y ago
        Yes, you are an atypical user. You also don't work for Facebook, so you don't have insight into all their priorities. Facebook is a data-driven company. They've publicly discussed the process that resulted in the current tab bar design. In initial tests, they saw a drop in newsfeed views; they solved it by badging the newsfeed tab when new content arrives. Requests get their own tab because adding friends to your network is probably a critical priority, and if you really want a user to do something, you give it a top-level navigation item.
        dperfect 11y ago
        No argument here about Facebook's priorities or being data-driven. I don't doubt any of what you're saying. Still, as a user I don't care if data suggests that it's in Facebook's best interest to require a separate app for messages (and keeping around a tab that does absolutely nothing in the current app). I'm sure that is better for their business, at least in the short run. But from a user experience design perspective, I'll probably never see that as better design. Littering your app with ads may be great for business, but I wouldn't consider ads in an app to be "great design" in general. I fully understand that design is meant to serve a purpose - usually the interests of a business, but I'd draw a line when it comes at the expense of frustrating your users (and no, I'm not atypical in my frustration with Facebook). That philosophy is at the core of what's killing Facebook. My opinion, as always, so take it or leave it.
        x0054 11y ago
        It's beyond me why they made the choice to move out Messages to a different app. Not only is it incredibly frustrating when I accidentally click the messages tab bar, and the entire FB app closes and another app opens, with no easy way to quickly go back (on iOS), but it also eliminated one of the very few reasons I ever needed to open FB app in the first place, to chat with people. Before, when I would open the FB app to chat with people, I would inevitably quickly look through the feed, and be exposed to one or two of their crappy ads. Now I can just open the FB Chat client and never bother with the main app. A win for me, perhaps. But a win for FB?
thaumaturgy 11y ago
> I personally don't find anything wrong with a hamburger menu per se. The trouble, which the article describes with some case studies on engagement before and after hamburger menu implementations, is that people who are not you are confused by it and don't understand it to be a menu. fwiw, I've encountered this quite a bit when helping users switch from Internet Explorer to Firefox or Chrome -- both of which use the stupid hamburger menu -- an users hate it and "being able to find things" is probably the number one reported reason that they go back to Internet Explorer. ed: for a more specific example, look at Firefox or Chrome, try really hard to imagine that you are a first time user of that web browser, but you've used IE before, and then figure out how to do one of the most common things that people want to do with a web browser: bookmark a page.
- bhauer 11y ago
  > fwiw, I've encountered this quite a bit when helping users switch from Internet Explorer to Firefox or Chrome -- both of which use the stupid hamburger menu -- an users hate it and "being able to find things" is probably the number one reported reason that they go back to Internet Explorer. Even as a routine Firefox user, I never use the "hamburger menu." Instead, to reach functions not visible on my toolbar, I just press Alt to reveal the traditional drop-down menus and use those. I still remember when I first heard someone call the three-line button a "hamburger." Variations had been around for some time, and I think people generally called it a "list" or "menu" button. I personally thought it looked like a thumb grip, so when it appeared on mobile as something you could grab and slide, for a while I called it a grip. The name "hamburger" has never resonated with me. So admittedly part of my disdain for the hamburger is simply the new name. I am generally in favor of the article's argument, especially in large-display contexts such as desktop computing. As much as I can appreciate the visual minimalism of mobile designs, it can feel frustrating and constraining to navigate a mobile design in a large-display context.
  - ploxiln 11y ago
    It's also funny that on the desktop OS designed by Apple, that paragon of modern and superficially minimal design, the menu is always visible (in the menu bar, just for the focused application). Other desktops trying to be as "easy and beautiful" as OS X are doing more to hide the classic menu. (not an apple fanboy, I promise, I've spent more time with linux overall)
latortuga 11y ago
The title of the article is "The Hamburger Menu Doesn't Work" not "The Hamburger Menu Is Bad". Not only that, they present actual evidence about it not working for a number of apps and websites.
marcosdumay 11y ago
Before the hamburger menu, people were complaining about the MS Office style ribbon. Design fads are an endless cycle of "ops, just froze my thumb!" -> "wait, I'll just put your hand on fire to solve that" -> "ops, my hand is on fire!" -> "wait let me freeze your arm", and so on. Just like the ribbon, there are plenty of things wrong with the hamburger. One of them is that people can not even find it on a large screen. Both can be used well (look at AutoCad 2010 for a good example of ribbon; there are plenty of good examples of the hamburger on phone apps), and both are widely abused. But I'll just disagree that almost everything needs it. Almost nothing on a desktop of tablet needs it, it's a phone thing.
- Ollinson 11y ago
  hah I like your endless cycle analogy
bcheung 11y ago
It's a common pattern that is used everywhere. If we were to zero base think, then yeah, it's absolutely horrible. But since it is already established people look for it. Better to go with an established pattern than reinvent your own. That being said, the article advocates tab bars and I think that is fine if you have the screen real estate. Often times you don't though.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
joeyspn 11y ago
> As in all things design, I suppose a balance needs to be found, but I personally don't find anything wrong with a hamburger menu per se. It's not about balance, cluttering or abuses, it's all about engagement. Ultimately design decisions must be data-driven. If using other nav patterns you increase user engagement (and consequently revenue for the company) the hamburger should be replaced. So, A/B test it, and you will learn which is the correct choice: hamburger, tabs, segmented control, etc
collyw 11y ago
As a software engineer who spends way too much time on front of a computer, I think it took me over a year to notice that a hamburger menu was a consistent user interface feature on phone apps and elsewhere.
- Kequc 11y ago
  I also am the person you describe. Once I figured out that it was a menu, and not that the world switched to a super-minimal feature-stripped interface for mobile websites. I never felt I liked it. I can click on tiny "Click [here]" links in the middle of a bunch of text on my phone. I can certainly click on a normal menu too. Then, I started to notice it in css frameworks. So, even I started to use it. But, they were just such a pain. Every time. Trying to manipulate their behaviour even slightly was an exercise and in the end I was never happy with the result. I'm in full agreement that this interface should go away. I was happy to read the article and discover I haven't gone mad.

sandofsky 11y ago

You put the most important menu items in a tab bar. If you really, really need the other junk, hide the long tail of menu items in a "more" tab.

dperfect 11y ago
I agree that sometimes that works really well. Still, for some apps/websites there is really only one obvious and important function. In those cases, a tab bar would just be putting "the other junk" in a more important place than it should be. There will always be a conflict in design between minimalism and functionality. The hamburger menu just happens to be prime territory upon which that battle is fought.
- sandofsky 11y ago
  There's always an exception, but your app probably isn't one of them.
  - dperfect 11y ago
    Out of curiosity I just opened up Facebook on my iPhone (mentioned in the article as a good example). The tab bar has 5 items: News Feed, Requests, Messages, Notifications, and More. I'm in the News Feed 99% of the time. Requests and Notifications are pretty much redundant (since requests become notifications) and could easily be put somewhere else - maybe nav/title bar. Messages is completely useless - just shows me a button to install a different app that I don't care about (of course that's "better for metrics", but not better for users). And "More"... well that's a standard hamburger menu, and frankly the only thing that needs to be there in my opinion. Maybe I'm an atypical user, but that experience seems to be the case in a lot of tabbed apps.
    - sandofsky 11y ago
      Yes, you are an atypical user. You also don't work for Facebook, so you don't have insight into all their priorities. Facebook is a data-driven company. They've publicly discussed the process that resulted in the current tab bar design. In initial tests, they saw a drop in newsfeed views; they solved it by badging the newsfeed tab when new content arrives. Requests get their own tab because adding friends to your network is probably a critical priority, and if you really want a user to do something, you give it a top-level navigation item.
      - dperfect 11y ago
        No argument here about Facebook's priorities or being data-driven. I don't doubt any of what you're saying. Still, as a user I don't care if data suggests that it's in Facebook's best interest to require a separate app for messages (and keeping around a tab that does absolutely nothing in the current app). I'm sure that is better for their business, at least in the short run. But from a user experience design perspective, I'll probably never see that as better design. Littering your app with ads may be great for business, but I wouldn't consider ads in an app to be "great design" in general. I fully understand that design is meant to serve a purpose - usually the interests of a business, but I'd draw a line when it comes at the expense of frustrating your users (and no, I'm not atypical in my frustration with Facebook). That philosophy is at the core of what's killing Facebook. My opinion, as always, so take it or leave it.
        x0054 11y ago
        It's beyond me why they made the choice to move out Messages to a different app. Not only is it incredibly frustrating when I accidentally click the messages tab bar, and the entire FB app closes and another app opens, with no easy way to quickly go back (on iOS), but it also eliminated one of the very few reasons I ever needed to open FB app in the first place, to chat with people. Before, when I would open the FB app to chat with people, I would inevitably quickly look through the feed, and be exposed to one or two of their crappy ads. Now I can just open the FB Chat client and never bother with the main app. A win for me, perhaps. But a win for FB?

thaumaturgy 11y ago

> I personally don't find anything wrong with a hamburger menu per se. The trouble, which the article describes with some case studies on engagement before and after hamburger menu implementations, is that people who are not you are confused by it and don't understand it to be a menu. fwiw, I've encountered this quite a bit when helping users switch from Internet Explorer to Firefox or Chrome -- both of which use the stupid hamburger menu -- an users hate it and "being able to find things" is probably the number one reported reason that they go back to Internet Explorer. ed: for a more specific example, look at Firefox or Chrome, try really hard to imagine that you are a first time user of that web browser, but you've used IE before, and then figure out how to do one of the most common things that people want to do with a web browser: bookmark a page.

bhauer 11y ago
> fwiw, I've encountered this quite a bit when helping users switch from Internet Explorer to Firefox or Chrome -- both of which use the stupid hamburger menu -- an users hate it and "being able to find things" is probably the number one reported reason that they go back to Internet Explorer. Even as a routine Firefox user, I never use the "hamburger menu." Instead, to reach functions not visible on my toolbar, I just press Alt to reveal the traditional drop-down menus and use those. I still remember when I first heard someone call the three-line button a "hamburger." Variations had been around for some time, and I think people generally called it a "list" or "menu" button. I personally thought it looked like a thumb grip, so when it appeared on mobile as something you could grab and slide, for a while I called it a grip. The name "hamburger" has never resonated with me. So admittedly part of my disdain for the hamburger is simply the new name. I am generally in favor of the article's argument, especially in large-display contexts such as desktop computing. As much as I can appreciate the visual minimalism of mobile designs, it can feel frustrating and constraining to navigate a mobile design in a large-display context.
- ploxiln 11y ago
  It's also funny that on the desktop OS designed by Apple, that paragon of modern and superficially minimal design, the menu is always visible (in the menu bar, just for the focused application). Other desktops trying to be as "easy and beautiful" as OS X are doing more to hide the classic menu. (not an apple fanboy, I promise, I've spent more time with linux overall)

latortuga 11y ago

The title of the article is "The Hamburger Menu Doesn't Work" not "The Hamburger Menu Is Bad". Not only that, they present actual evidence about it not working for a number of apps and websites.

marcosdumay 11y ago

Before the hamburger menu, people were complaining about the MS Office style ribbon. Design fads are an endless cycle of "ops, just froze my thumb!" -> "wait, I'll just put your hand on fire to solve that" -> "ops, my hand is on fire!" -> "wait let me freeze your arm", and so on. Just like the ribbon, there are plenty of things wrong with the hamburger. One of them is that people can not even find it on a large screen. Both can be used well (look at AutoCad 2010 for a good example of ribbon; there are plenty of good examples of the hamburger on phone apps), and both are widely abused. But I'll just disagree that almost everything needs it. Almost nothing on a desktop of tablet needs it, it's a phone thing.

Ollinson 11y ago
hah I like your endless cycle analogy

bcheung 11y ago

It's a common pattern that is used everywhere. If we were to zero base think, then yeah, it's absolutely horrible. But since it is already established people look for it. Better to go with an established pattern than reinvent your own. That being said, the article advocates tab bars and I think that is fine if you have the screen real estate. Often times you don't though.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

joeyspn 11y ago

> As in all things design, I suppose a balance needs to be found, but I personally don't find anything wrong with a hamburger menu per se. It's not about balance, cluttering or abuses, it's all about engagement. Ultimately design decisions must be data-driven. If using other nav patterns you increase user engagement (and consequently revenue for the company) the hamburger should be replaced. So, A/B test it, and you will learn which is the correct choice: hamburger, tabs, segmented control, etc

collyw 11y ago

As a software engineer who spends way too much time on front of a computer, I think it took me over a year to notice that a hamburger menu was a consistent user interface feature on phone apps and elsewhere.

Kequc 11y ago
I also am the person you describe. Once I figured out that it was a menu, and not that the world switched to a super-minimal feature-stripped interface for mobile websites. I never felt I liked it. I can click on tiny "Click [here]" links in the middle of a bunch of text on my phone. I can certainly click on a normal menu too. Then, I started to notice it in css frameworks. So, even I started to use it. But, they were just such a pain. Every time. Trying to manipulate their behaviour even slightly was an exercise and in the end I was never happy with the result. I'm in full agreement that this interface should go away. I was happy to read the article and discover I haven't gone mad.