5 ms·

I'm a developer, but I find this kind of criticism (that usually is in the designer's/PM's domain) exasperating. People write frustrated and angry posts saying

I'm a developer, but I find this kind of criticism (that usually is in the designer's/PM's domain) exasperating. People write frustrated and angry posts saying things like "you don't always know better than the user." You're decrying the method, not the choices, but its the choices you hate. When people make "opinionated software" we end up with much more useful tools, better experiences, and innovative ideas. Without designers forcing things on you that you don't necessarily want, and not giving you an option to turn it off, you end up with animated Myspace backgrounds, skinable MP3 players, and corporate portals. With that attitude, we get clean, informational, useful Facebook profiles, elderly and technophobic people using music software instead of carrying CDs, and Basecamp/Emacs org-mode/appropriate organization tools for the right job. I agree - the trending topics bar is not only buggy, it's freaking annoying. I personally haven't started looking to switch clients because I'm assuming it wont be long before it gets nixed. But I applaud the gall that goes behind pushing it out. I want people developing the software I use to try and enable (and push us along towards) greater things. If something happens I don't like, the world is a large place. I can go find someone else who hasn't gone crazy who writes competing software. But I'm not going to trash Twitter for taking that risk. Should they have thought it through more? I think so. Should they keep doing things in a similar spirit? Yes.

jokermatt999 16y ago
but its the choices you hate Indeed. However, the poor choice would not matter if there was option to fix that. we end up with much more useful tools, better experiences, and innovative ideas. I definitely agree with the 2nd and 3rd points, but how is a piece of software more useful or a better experience because I cannot customize it to be more useful to myself? you end up with animated Myspace backgrounds, skinable MP3 players, and corporate portals. Actually, two of these are examples of designers not giving an option to change things. Backgrounds should be able to be turned off (see how most IM clients will allow you to disable font styles to make things readable when talking to that friend who uses dark purple text on a black background). Corporate portals are example where there's no choice, assuming I'm reading that right. As for "skinnable MP3 players", I absolutely love foobar2000 specifically for that feature. I'm truly not getting how that's a bad thing, at all. But I'm not going to trash Twitter for taking that risk. Should they have thought it through more? I think so. Should they keep doing things in a similar spirit? Yes. This is where I think we simply disagree in philosophy. I can see how, as a designer, forcing new and interesting interfaces on a user can sometimes lead to innovation and change for the better. But as a user, I've found that I really dislike 99% of the time that's attempted, and I'd rather have the ability to overwrite what a bad designer decided was brilliant. There are good designs out there that I'm fine with and have never had to change, but most of the time, one interface does not fit everyone. Giving the user choice to tailor the interface to their preference and their use reflects that. Edit: to expand further, I strongly agree with statement "good design should be transparent". The user should not have to think about the UI; it should enable them to do what they'd like painlessly. If a user goes looking for an option to change something that annoys them in the interface, then the interface is getting in the way of the user. As a side note, this philosophy can be seen at the root of people who love Apple/hate Apple. Those who love Apple tend to admire them for their excellent sense of design and wonderfully made products. Those who hate Apple tend to dislike the idea that Apple tends to make decisions for its users, and have run up against that lack of choice one too many times. At least, that's my perspective as someone on the "generally disliking" side.
- moxiemk1 16y ago
  As you said, I am sure we do differ in philosophy - I feel like your dislike of things you can't customize to make them more useful to yourself and the idea that "if a user goes looking for an option to change something that annoys them in the interface, then the interface is getting in the way of the user" (in addition to the other arguments; I won't bore you by quoting all of them :) to be missing the forest for the trees. The motivation that I admire behind this feature (and I presume that you do not) is making a choice that makes some (most? all?) users uncomfortable (surprised? annoyed?) because they believe it will make the service better (in the most broad sense possible). People being aware of what is trending has the potential to keep people abreast of up-to-the-second current affairs, thoughts that are permeating the community, and ideas that similar people have that you may find intriguing. The community also has a prevailing interest in Twitter making money, since if it folds, the community ceases to exist (this is for values of community contained in "people currently using Twitter") and any good Twitter Co. can provide ceases to increase. Are these good enough reasons to introduce a truly hateful piece of UI? I don't think so. I'm glad they're willing to make decisions for reasons like the ones above, even if I think this one was not a good one. I personally am unconvinced trending topics can be introduced well, but I don't think introducing unpopular things is bad, especially when it's unpopular for the reasons you've stated.
prodigal_erik 16y ago
Opinionated software belongs in appliances for consumers, not tools for human beings. People altering their tools and finding unanticipated uses for them is where progress comes from.
- moxiemk1 16y ago
  Progress comes not from the action of modifying the tool, but from adoption of the modification by those who it benefits (in a maximally holistic sense) I find the distinction you make between "appliances" and "tools" to be non-existent - everything is an appliance at some level, and all tools are opinionated at some level.
  - prodigal_erik 16y ago
    Tools have only limitations inherent in how they're made, and overcoming those can actually create new technology. Appliances also have artificial limitations imposed by the designers, and overcoming those (if it's even possible without starting from scratch) is a waste of effort that merely negates the designers' efforts and gets you back to the tool which was your birthright.
moe 16y ago
Without designers forcing things on you that you don't necessarily want, and not giving you an option to turn it off, you end up with animated Myspace backgrounds, skinable MP3 players, and corporate portals. And the problem with skinable MP3 players is? And how do myspace or corporate portals relate to a twitter client?
- krakensden 16y ago
  > And the problem with skinable MP3 players is? Some people are still angry about Winamp.
  - moe 16y ago
    Huh? I haven't used winamp in about 10 years - but originally it was a very nice little audio-player, and iirc skinnable from day 1. Whatever bad they may have done to it must have happened after the skin-support. Edit: I'd also appreciate if people who disagree with my questions would respond rather than downvote.
cabalamat 16y ago
> Without designers forcing things on you that you don't necessarily want, and not giving you an option to turn it off, you end up with animated Myspace backgrounds The problem with MySpace was not that it was customisable, it was that it was not customisable enough. What they should have done was to allow users to customise their page -- and also to allow users to customise how other people's pages would look to them.

jokermatt999 16y ago

but its the choices you hate Indeed. However, the poor choice would not matter if there was option to fix that. we end up with much more useful tools, better experiences, and innovative ideas. I definitely agree with the 2nd and 3rd points, but how is a piece of software more useful or a better experience because I cannot customize it to be more useful to myself? you end up with animated Myspace backgrounds, skinable MP3 players, and corporate portals. Actually, two of these are examples of designers not giving an option to change things. Backgrounds should be able to be turned off (see how most IM clients will allow you to disable font styles to make things readable when talking to that friend who uses dark purple text on a black background). Corporate portals are example where there's no choice, assuming I'm reading that right. As for "skinnable MP3 players", I absolutely love foobar2000 specifically for that feature. I'm truly not getting how that's a bad thing, at all. But I'm not going to trash Twitter for taking that risk. Should they have thought it through more? I think so. Should they keep doing things in a similar spirit? Yes. This is where I think we simply disagree in philosophy. I can see how, as a designer, forcing new and interesting interfaces on a user can sometimes lead to innovation and change for the better. But as a user, I've found that I really dislike 99% of the time that's attempted, and I'd rather have the ability to overwrite what a bad designer decided was brilliant. There are good designs out there that I'm fine with and have never had to change, but most of the time, one interface does not fit everyone. Giving the user choice to tailor the interface to their preference and their use reflects that. Edit: to expand further, I strongly agree with statement "good design should be transparent". The user should not have to think about the UI; it should enable them to do what they'd like painlessly. If a user goes looking for an option to change something that annoys them in the interface, then the interface is getting in the way of the user. As a side note, this philosophy can be seen at the root of people who love Apple/hate Apple. Those who love Apple tend to admire them for their excellent sense of design and wonderfully made products. Those who hate Apple tend to dislike the idea that Apple tends to make decisions for its users, and have run up against that lack of choice one too many times. At least, that's my perspective as someone on the "generally disliking" side.

moxiemk1 16y ago
As you said, I am sure we do differ in philosophy - I feel like your dislike of things you can't customize to make them more useful to yourself and the idea that "if a user goes looking for an option to change something that annoys them in the interface, then the interface is getting in the way of the user" (in addition to the other arguments; I won't bore you by quoting all of them :) to be missing the forest for the trees. The motivation that I admire behind this feature (and I presume that you do not) is making a choice that makes some (most? all?) users uncomfortable (surprised? annoyed?) because they believe it will make the service better (in the most broad sense possible). People being aware of what is trending has the potential to keep people abreast of up-to-the-second current affairs, thoughts that are permeating the community, and ideas that similar people have that you may find intriguing. The community also has a prevailing interest in Twitter making money, since if it folds, the community ceases to exist (this is for values of community contained in "people currently using Twitter") and any good Twitter Co. can provide ceases to increase. Are these good enough reasons to introduce a truly hateful piece of UI? I don't think so. I'm glad they're willing to make decisions for reasons like the ones above, even if I think this one was not a good one. I personally am unconvinced trending topics can be introduced well, but I don't think introducing unpopular things is bad, especially when it's unpopular for the reasons you've stated.

prodigal_erik 16y ago

Opinionated software belongs in appliances for consumers, not tools for human beings. People altering their tools and finding unanticipated uses for them is where progress comes from.

moxiemk1 16y ago
Progress comes not from the action of modifying the tool, but from adoption of the modification by those who it benefits (in a maximally holistic sense) I find the distinction you make between "appliances" and "tools" to be non-existent - everything is an appliance at some level, and all tools are opinionated at some level.
- prodigal_erik 16y ago
  Tools have only limitations inherent in how they're made, and overcoming those can actually create new technology. Appliances also have artificial limitations imposed by the designers, and overcoming those (if it's even possible without starting from scratch) is a waste of effort that merely negates the designers' efforts and gets you back to the tool which was your birthright.

moe 16y ago

Without designers forcing things on you that you don't necessarily want, and not giving you an option to turn it off, you end up with animated Myspace backgrounds, skinable MP3 players, and corporate portals. And the problem with skinable MP3 players is? And how do myspace or corporate portals relate to a twitter client?

krakensden 16y ago
> And the problem with skinable MP3 players is? Some people are still angry about Winamp.
- moe 16y ago
  Huh? I haven't used winamp in about 10 years - but originally it was a very nice little audio-player, and iirc skinnable from day 1. Whatever bad they may have done to it must have happened after the skin-support. Edit: I'd also appreciate if people who disagree with my questions would respond rather than downvote.

cabalamat 16y ago

> Without designers forcing things on you that you don't necessarily want, and not giving you an option to turn it off, you end up with animated Myspace backgrounds The problem with MySpace was not that it was customisable, it was that it was not customisable enough. What they should have done was to allow users to customise their page -- and also to allow users to customise how other people's pages would look to them.