6 ms·

> 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

> 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)
  - alejohausner 11y ago
    Apple chose to always have an active menu at the top of the screen because of Fitts' law, which roughly says that bigger buttons can be clicked on more quickly than small ones (see wikipedia for a more precise mathematical description). Duh. With the menu at the top, the user can slam the mouse pointer to the top edge, and simply focus on moving the pointer left of right. This is perceptually equivalent to having the screen divided into several tall stripes, one for each menu item. The menu items thus act like buttons with very large screen area. On a small mobile device, this trick is used too: most of the UI buttons are on the edges of the display. Compare this experience with trying to hit a tab or button on the top edge of your application's window (on a desktop computer). The top edge is rather narrow, and the targets sitting on that edge have small area. It takes much more effort to hit them, than if they were planted at the top of the screen. From what I've read, Apple chose this design way back in the stone age era (early 1980s), after actually doing user testing! New isn't always better.
TheTravCav 11y ago
>people who are not you are confused by it and don't understand it This is the history of computers and users. So many technologies that seem completely intuitive now started out just like this. being confused by it and don't understand it is only a problem if stays that way like shortcut key combos. Hamburger menus are like "right click". it's not that bad and when people have seen it a few times it won't be some confusing.
- thaumaturgy 11y ago
  The trouble is that so many software developers in particular use this argument to justify every single silly notion they come up with. "Users just hate change, they'll get used to it and then they'll love it" is not a good engine for UI design.
- ocdtrekkie 11y ago
  People still don't understand right click. Hate to break this to you. UI that isn't clear and visible on the screen is unhelpful UI.
  - qzcx 11y ago
    Which is why most right click menu options also can be found in another place. The right click menu is a shortcut much like hotkeys. Not essential, but convenient.
  - aninhumer 11y ago
    >UI that isn't clear and visible on the screen is unhelpful UI. It's unintuitive and undiscoverable, but I wouldn't necessarily call it unhelpful...
  - ams6110 11y ago
    They don't understand double click either. I know people who double click everything - buttons, hyperlinks, everything.
    - function_seven 11y ago
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
pbreit 11y ago
Part of the engagement reduction has to do with simple confusion on what the heck it is but I think even when it's well-understood it's clunky and distracts from better UX design.
a3n 11y ago
> 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. I confess I'd seen these for awhile before it dawned on me "you should totally click that!" And today I learned what they're called. As I saw the headline a few times at work, waiting to get home before I read it, I tried to imagine what a hamburger menu might be (and I never guessed it was what it is). I imagined the menu at a hamburger store like McD's. And what most looks like that is the columns of small print links at the bottom of big kids' sites like Amazon. (And do those have a name?)
x0054 11y ago
> 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. You press Command+D, dauh. You know D for Bookmark :)
digi_owl 11y ago
I find myself attributing this to the constantly hammered home message from Apple and MS about how easy computer use is. Therefore when something is "not easy" (aka, breaks with people's rote learning), people having trouble will not admit it. As it will in their mind be the equivalent of admitting they are stupid.
anon4 11y ago
> bookmark a page Last I checked bookmarking a page is just clicking the star button to the right of the search bar. Though maybe Firefox on Windows has a different UI nowadays. You could also (still, thankfully) just enable the menu bar in Firefox.
- brewdad 11y ago
  Funny thing, I am so used to Ctrl-D that I have never used the star button. Until now, I didn't even know what it was for. Different strokes different folks I guess.

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)
- alejohausner 11y ago
  Apple chose to always have an active menu at the top of the screen because of Fitts' law, which roughly says that bigger buttons can be clicked on more quickly than small ones (see wikipedia for a more precise mathematical description). Duh. With the menu at the top, the user can slam the mouse pointer to the top edge, and simply focus on moving the pointer left of right. This is perceptually equivalent to having the screen divided into several tall stripes, one for each menu item. The menu items thus act like buttons with very large screen area. On a small mobile device, this trick is used too: most of the UI buttons are on the edges of the display. Compare this experience with trying to hit a tab or button on the top edge of your application's window (on a desktop computer). The top edge is rather narrow, and the targets sitting on that edge have small area. It takes much more effort to hit them, than if they were planted at the top of the screen. From what I've read, Apple chose this design way back in the stone age era (early 1980s), after actually doing user testing! New isn't always better.

TheTravCav 11y ago

>people who are not you are confused by it and don't understand it This is the history of computers and users. So many technologies that seem completely intuitive now started out just like this. being confused by it and don't understand it is only a problem if stays that way like shortcut key combos. Hamburger menus are like "right click". it's not that bad and when people have seen it a few times it won't be some confusing.

thaumaturgy 11y ago
The trouble is that so many software developers in particular use this argument to justify every single silly notion they come up with. "Users just hate change, they'll get used to it and then they'll love it" is not a good engine for UI design.
ocdtrekkie 11y ago
People still don't understand right click. Hate to break this to you. UI that isn't clear and visible on the screen is unhelpful UI.
- qzcx 11y ago
  Which is why most right click menu options also can be found in another place. The right click menu is a shortcut much like hotkeys. Not essential, but convenient.
- aninhumer 11y ago
  >UI that isn't clear and visible on the screen is unhelpful UI. It's unintuitive and undiscoverable, but I wouldn't necessarily call it unhelpful...
- ams6110 11y ago
  They don't understand double click either. I know people who double click everything - buttons, hyperlinks, everything.
  - function_seven 11y ago

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

pbreit 11y ago

Part of the engagement reduction has to do with simple confusion on what the heck it is but I think even when it's well-understood it's clunky and distracts from better UX design.

a3n 11y ago

> 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. I confess I'd seen these for awhile before it dawned on me "you should totally click that!" And today I learned what they're called. As I saw the headline a few times at work, waiting to get home before I read it, I tried to imagine what a hamburger menu might be (and I never guessed it was what it is). I imagined the menu at a hamburger store like McD's. And what most looks like that is the columns of small print links at the bottom of big kids' sites like Amazon. (And do those have a name?)

x0054 11y ago

> 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. You press Command+D, dauh. You know D for Bookmark :)

digi_owl 11y ago

I find myself attributing this to the constantly hammered home message from Apple and MS about how easy computer use is. Therefore when something is "not easy" (aka, breaks with people's rote learning), people having trouble will not admit it. As it will in their mind be the equivalent of admitting they are stupid.

anon4 11y ago

> bookmark a page Last I checked bookmarking a page is just clicking the star button to the right of the search bar. Though maybe Firefox on Windows has a different UI nowadays. You could also (still, thankfully) just enable the menu bar in Firefox.

brewdad 11y ago
Funny thing, I am so used to Ctrl-D that I have never used the star button. Until now, I didn't even know what it was for. Different strokes different folks I guess.