9 ms·

Emulating native UI is definitely the wrong approach; it only highlights your apps weaknesses. However I think you're overstating the important of things like

Emulating native UI is definitely the wrong approach; it only highlights your apps weaknesses. However I think you're overstating the important of things like scrolling inertia; users do not mind this too much. It's shown by the fact that they all choose "inferior" experiences on the desktop when they log into their Yahoo Mail and Hotmail account; or worse, just use pop3. Users will choose a solution 1) That they know about, 2) that meets their needs, 3) that is easiest. UX is probably 4th. Trivialities like page transitions and scrolling inertia only matters to the SXSW crowd.

nupark2 15y ago
Trivialities like page transitions and scrolling inertia only matters to the SXSW crowd. Scrolling inertia is about utility -- being able to easily flick through a long list (such as Netflix's movies). It's a real, intentional user experience feature, not just some easily dismissed "SXSW crowd" aesthetic. That said, I agree that foremost, users choose products that solve their problems. However, that doesn't mean that a quality native application isn't a significant competitive advantage. If there are two products that solve their problems equally, they'll choose the one with the best user experience. If users are choosing a product with a lesser user experience, chances are good that the competition with a seemingly better UX isn't actually solving their problems.