3 ms·

The Impossible Bloomberg Makeover

• look_lookatme 17y ago
  "The only valid reason explaining why Bloomberg design will not change is the behavior of its users. Users who favor complexity and clutter over efficiency and clarity to sustain a fictive status symbol." I really do believe functional design is important, but this article and the comments illustrate the hubris of the design/ux community at times. There are expensive realities to deal with in changing the terminal even slightly. Furthermore the mockups presented are laughably simple. To the OP's point, trading is crazy complex and for people not in it the first reaction to its esotericism is to assume it's some sort of artificial wall to keep casual observers out. I imagine there is truth to that, but how about this designer actually sit behind a trading desk and try and deal with the stresses associated with uncertainty, prediction, volume and expectations before they pass judgement on bloomberg and their reluctance to rock the design boat. I expect a little designer onanism from a site called uxmag, but this article is over the top. These people really do think they can wield their designer hammer with impunity.