3 ms·
I think the article misses the point that many design modifications are micro-optimizations. The entire goal is that the user doesn't notice (cognitively) but
by austincheney 8y ago
I think the article misses the point that many design modifications are micro-optimizations. The entire goal is that the user doesn't notice (cognitively) but is modified in their behavior none the less. These sorts of micro-optimizations frequently made Travelocity hundreds of thousands of dollars when I was their A/B test developer. Adding a phone number to one page added an estimated $3 million in revenue.
- debaserab2 8y agoI don’t think that really qualifies as a redesign on the scale the article describes. It sounds like the author is describing a total UI overhaul, not simply modifying one element on one page of the design.
- CydeWeys 8y agoThe way I read the article, it said that none of this stuff was worth doing -- just get it barely usable and then stop making changes. But it clearly is worth doing based on A/B testing and real, measured results. When millions of people are using your site, even micro-optimizations are worth doing.
- Pxtl 8y agoThey specifically mention repositioning the logout button to make it more accessible. That sounds like a micro-optimization.
- bobblywobbles 8y agoLike I pointed out, I am all in favor of micro-optimizations, it is complete UI redesigns that have no merit or basis to derive their change upon that I'm against. Adding a phone number is good, yes if it adds $3 million dollars, go ahead and do it!