4 ms·
I appreciate your honesty and feedback. However, every article offers thorough and detailed reasoning of why something is suggested as a best practice. The reas
by UXMovement 16y ago
I appreciate your honesty and feedback. However, every article offers thorough and detailed reasoning of why something is suggested as a best practice. The reasoning is key.
It's also important to remember that just because it's a best practice does not mean it will apply for every design in every case, which is why testing should be done on your own with your own site if you feel the need.
We believe that picking ideas apart through and through with the use of experience, logic and intuition with brilliant design thinkers is the only way to arrive at something substantial and meaningful.
Simply accepting something because it has been tested or researched is not good enough, and does not engage the mind. Independently thinking about an idea with other independent thinkers is the only true way to arrive at something meaningful. While this is probably quite difficult, we are up to the challenge.
- jdrock 16y agoThat's all well and good, but we'd still prefer some more data backing up your claims. The claims made in your article on how people read text were refuted by a paper linked here on HN. That alone makes your future articles and the claims made in them somewhat questionable.
- UXMovement 16y agoI don't think so. A link to the paper please.
- JacobAldridge 16y agoI think jdrock might be referring to this - http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=985921.986078&type=series http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=985921.986078&type...
- jdrock 16y agoInteresting. Your response is enough to make me unsubscribe from your blog.
- teej 16y ago>> However, every article offers thorough and detailed reasoning of why something is suggested as a best practice. The reasoning is key. I could show you 10 thorough and detailed product pitches from seasoned and experienced people for Farmville. 8 out of those 10 pitches turn out to be utter failures in the field. Hacker News has little patience for armchair theory. Why do you think patio11 is so highly regarded? It's because he shows us why our rational thinking about users is wrong straight from the trenches.
- UXMovement 16y agoThis isn't "armchair theory". Read the article again. The reasons are solid and the end result is what it says it is. The article isn't saying if you do your search this way you will sell a billion products. Of course if that was the claim some statistical proof would be necessary. All the article is doing is offering a simpler and cleaner approach to search. That's all.
- deleted 16y ago[deleted]
- patio11 16y agoMeaning no disrespect, but I've on occasion had the situation where independent thinkers doing independent thinking suggest that A is the Acknowledged Right Way To Do Things. The example which leaps instantly to mind is consistent navigation placement: your nav bar should be visible, consistent, and always in the same place throughout the website, right? Amazon hides sitewide navigation during checkout. I don't go quite so far, but I've tested a few variations, including A: sitewide nav and B: one-off nav which includes only things that I feel are likely to increase conversion. B crushes A in tests on my site, to the tune of "would cost me thousands of bucks a year to do A instead". Do I get a subsidy from the Right Honorable Guild Of Independent Thinkers for doing it the correct way? Because doing it the way that actually works is really tempting.