3 ms·

Since this is trending on HN here's my CRO public service announcement: Hamburger menus have been conclusively proven to be shit UX elements. They lose on eve

by aresant 11y ago

Since this is trending on HN here's my CRO public service announcement: Hamburger menus have been conclusively proven to be shit UX elements. They lose on every metric against similarly sized, but clearly labeled "menu" buttons along with other permutations. So if you care about users actually using your menus, study-up on the alternative formats and, as usual, test it yourself: (1) http://moovweb.com/blog/hamburger-menu-handy-tool-or-useless-icon/ http://moovweb.com/blog/hamburger-menu-handy-tool-or-useless... (2) http://exisweb.net/menu-eats-hamburger http://exisweb.net/menu-eats-hamburger (3) http://conversionxl.com/testing-hamburger-icon-revenue/ http://conversionxl.com/testing-hamburger-icon-revenue/

daveguy 11y ago
Most ux elements are shit until people learn to recognize them and understand them. If people don't yet understand that they are the main menu then they soon will. They are especially good for space constricted interfaces, like phones. The conversionxl study is from mid 2014 so the results may be dated.
- aresant 11y ago
  "The conversionxl study is from mid 2014 so the results may be dated." The first study I linked to is from less than a year ago and finds the exact same results.
  - daveguy 11y ago
    No, it did not find the exact same results. CXL found that it was horrible in 2014. The first one from less than a year ago found that it just needs to be labeled to be more effective (with "effective" defined as interactions), and that it definitely has a place as a space saving menu icon on mobile apps. And 1-2 years from now you probably won't need a menu label. Paricularly on mobile where it is already becoming the de facto space saving standard.
natrius 11y ago
Is number of menu clicks actually a metric that should be maximized? If the only functions in the hamburger menu are things you don't actually need to use the app, you're probably fine. Consider Lyft and Uber. Their sidebar menus let you view your history, change your payment information, etc. But you don't need any of those to use the app. If you're going to hide functionality, make sure users can have a good experience even if they don't find it.
- pavlov 11y ago
  As an overflow menu for rarely used controls, the hamburger is fine. It (and its cousin the three-dot ellipse menu) have been used that way for years. As a main menu, it's terrible for that exact same reason. The hamburger menu is where people expect to find secondary actions, and suddenly you're putting the most important navigation there. Why? It's like having a department store's main entrance in the back alley next to the trash cans. Someone may reply with, "We just need to teach users about the new meaning of the hamburger menu". Again, why? What's the point?
mathattack 11y ago
I agree - I'm not a fan of hamburgers. But against Nomran's [0] advice I blame myself. It's taken many times to realize what they are, but I assume that I'm just a fogey who is slow in understanding the new standard. :-) I assume that the game is over and eventually we'll all catch up. [0] http://www.amazon.com/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/dp/1452654123 http://www.amazon.com/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/d...

by aresant 11y ago

daveguy 11y ago

Most ux elements are shit until people learn to recognize them and understand them. If people don't yet understand that they are the main menu then they soon will. They are especially good for space constricted interfaces, like phones. The conversionxl study is from mid 2014 so the results may be dated.

aresant 11y ago
"The conversionxl study is from mid 2014 so the results may be dated." The first study I linked to is from less than a year ago and finds the exact same results.
- daveguy 11y ago
  No, it did not find the exact same results. CXL found that it was horrible in 2014. The first one from less than a year ago found that it just needs to be labeled to be more effective (with "effective" defined as interactions), and that it definitely has a place as a space saving menu icon on mobile apps. And 1-2 years from now you probably won't need a menu label. Paricularly on mobile where it is already becoming the de facto space saving standard.

natrius 11y ago

Is number of menu clicks actually a metric that should be maximized? If the only functions in the hamburger menu are things you don't actually need to use the app, you're probably fine. Consider Lyft and Uber. Their sidebar menus let you view your history, change your payment information, etc. But you don't need any of those to use the app. If you're going to hide functionality, make sure users can have a good experience even if they don't find it.

pavlov 11y ago
As an overflow menu for rarely used controls, the hamburger is fine. It (and its cousin the three-dot ellipse menu) have been used that way for years. As a main menu, it's terrible for that exact same reason. The hamburger menu is where people expect to find secondary actions, and suddenly you're putting the most important navigation there. Why? It's like having a department store's main entrance in the back alley next to the trash cans. Someone may reply with, "We just need to teach users about the new meaning of the hamburger menu". Again, why? What's the point?

mathattack 11y ago

I agree - I'm not a fan of hamburgers. But against Nomran's [0] advice I blame myself. It's taken many times to realize what they are, but I assume that I'm just a fogey who is slow in understanding the new standard. :-) I assume that the game is over and eventually we'll all catch up. [0] http://www.amazon.com/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/dp/1452654123 http://www.amazon.com/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/d...