3 ms·
The problem with this reasoning is that, in simplifying everything, you may get more users but you may make your product less useful for some, because you've re
by nudge 16y ago
The problem with this reasoning is that, in simplifying everything, you may get more users but you may make your product less useful for some, because you've removed features. And what if they're the most valuable customers? What if Adobe made Photoshop much, much simpler, by removing lots of tools that aren't used by everyone?
There are many ways to make something successful. Simplifying for the masses is one way. It's not the only way.
- slindstr 16y agoI think this article is on the right track, but I agree with you that you shouldn't necessarily minimize the number of features you have. I think, like the article said, your app should be known for doing one thing really really well (i.e. Google = search) but it could also have a lot of other features. These features should augment the one major feature that the app is known for and they should be simple to learn so you don't overwhelm your users.
- exspiro 16y agothe trick is in augmenting a simple interface with powerful technology a.k.a added functionality.
- exspiro 16y agoi agree that there are a set of users that are much more hardcore than the masses. it's a delicate balance. if you only cater to the advanced users your growth curves will parallel.