Making things simple in an elegant way is difficult. It's one of the hardest challenges in UX. You can take a knife to things and make a lot of well-intentioned

Making things simple in an elegant way is difficult. It's one of the hardest challenges in UX. You can take a knife to things and make a lot of well-intentioned mistakes. There are also domain-specific challenges you need to consider and every domain is going to have a completely different set of user needs, challenges, etc. This is where understanding your customer and understanding the variety of ways they shop is critical. In this case, it's an auto parts shop. I've bought auto parts enough to know my shopping behaviors and needs: 1) I know exactly what part I want and what to see what options are available for that part 2) I know roughly what I'm looking for but am not sure the exact part 3) I'm always going to buy for a specific car. Parts for other cars are irrelevant to me With these considerations, this site clearly made a few mistakes: 1) It didn't get the right car make, which is a critical flaw 2) By hiding out of stock items, they eliminated the ability to discover the product you actually need if you're only loosely aware of what you need (my #2 point above) 3) Only showing one relevant part is quite bad for auto parts. Brake pads come in different materials and I may want to choose. Rotor quality can vary a lot. Maybe I want painted instead of unpainted calipers. All this boils down to a case of not considering the actual customer. Good UX is aligning experiences with needs and behaviors and what's good UX in one application might be terrible in another. It seems like that is what happened here.