3 ms·

This is just curmudgeonliness backed by nothing at all. You probably shouldn't do major redesigns with no real benefit to the user (I'm looking at you, reddit)

This is just curmudgeonliness backed by nothing at all. You probably shouldn't do major redesigns with no real benefit to the user (I'm looking at you, reddit), but if you're adding or improving functionality, then feel free to incrementally improve your site constantly. People will get used to constant small improvements and will miss them if they stop. Users don't hate change, they hate arbitrary change that forces them to learn how to use your site again, or that removes features they enjoy.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
It's not "curmudgeonliness", it's the real deal. And the article makes your point, but in different words. Adding stuff itself doesn't disturb anything. But if the added stuff interferes with existing features in any way - including UI friction and performance degradation - people are gonna get angry ("badwill" will be created). Doubly so if you start removing features. It's important point to keep repeating, because accumulation of badwill doesn't show in the telemetry, so data-obsessed companies don't get it.
dgzl 7y ago
I agree with you in general, but I think you're missing a subset of users who can keep up with smaller incremental changes but specifically don't, which over time can eventually make them feel lost. This describes my relationship with Facebook. I've always generally understood how Facebook works and used to be a power-user. Over time as the new little features didn't apply to me, I found that my own interest had been crowded out and the environment felt entirely different, which further pushed me away. At this point I have very little confidence in my ability and understanding of Facebook.
shawndrost 7y ago
"Users don't hate change, they hate arbitrary change that forces them to learn how to use your site again, or that removes features they enjoy." How does this square with the overwhelmingly negative early responses to facebook's news feed, or reactions? Would you characterize them as "arbitrary"? I use those as examples because they now seem widely loved, so they seem like good (non-arbitrary) design to me, but they were poorly received.
- opportune 7y ago
  Is the facebook news feed actually widely loved now? I only hear yearning for the old chrono feed
miguelmota 7y ago
> backed by nothing at all What lol I mean just look at the tweets for the terms 'twitter redesign'; there's plenty of evidence that people feel strongly about redesigns. [0] https://twitter.com/search?q=twitter%20redesign&src=typed_query https://twitter.com/search?q=twitter%20redesign&src=typed_qu...

TeMPOraL 7y ago

It's not "curmudgeonliness", it's the real deal. And the article makes your point, but in different words. Adding stuff itself doesn't disturb anything. But if the added stuff interferes with existing features in any way - including UI friction and performance degradation - people are gonna get angry ("badwill" will be created). Doubly so if you start removing features. It's important point to keep repeating, because accumulation of badwill doesn't show in the telemetry, so data-obsessed companies don't get it.

dgzl 7y ago

I agree with you in general, but I think you're missing a subset of users who can keep up with smaller incremental changes but specifically don't, which over time can eventually make them feel lost. This describes my relationship with Facebook. I've always generally understood how Facebook works and used to be a power-user. Over time as the new little features didn't apply to me, I found that my own interest had been crowded out and the environment felt entirely different, which further pushed me away. At this point I have very little confidence in my ability and understanding of Facebook.

shawndrost 7y ago

"Users don't hate change, they hate arbitrary change that forces them to learn how to use your site again, or that removes features they enjoy." How does this square with the overwhelmingly negative early responses to facebook's news feed, or reactions? Would you characterize them as "arbitrary"? I use those as examples because they now seem widely loved, so they seem like good (non-arbitrary) design to me, but they were poorly received.

opportune 7y ago
Is the facebook news feed actually widely loved now? I only hear yearning for the old chrono feed

miguelmota 7y ago

> backed by nothing at all What lol I mean just look at the tweets for the terms 'twitter redesign'; there's plenty of evidence that people feel strongly about redesigns. [0] https://twitter.com/search?q=twitter%20redesign&src=typed_query https://twitter.com/search?q=twitter%20redesign&src=typed_qu...