4 ms·
Another non-cited story I've heard is an A/B test, or similar, was once done where they removed the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button from the front page, and an overw
by uxp 15y ago
Another non-cited story I've heard is an A/B test, or similar, was once done where they removed the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button from the front page, and an overwhelming number of users said they did not like the solitary search button. Having both gave the users a sense of choice, even though (as the story goes), "I'm feeling lucky" is used by only a small fraction of a percent of users.
- MikeCapone 15y agoI agree that it looks better with two buttons, though I can't quite articulate why.
- bluesmoon 15y agothis is so because we instinctively feel unbalanced when we see a single legged object rather than a two legged one. we'd feel similarly unbalanced if the two legs (the buttons) were of very different widths.
- access_denied 15y agoUnless you manage to lay meaning into the specifi difference of the widths. For instance making the 'coke' button larger than the 'coke diet' button to express that 'coke' gives you the standard/baseline type.
- mulletbum 15y agoI've heard this as well. Can't remember where from.
- joe_the_user 15y agoAnd humorously enough, the present "I'm feeling lucky" button literally cannot be pressed ... except on the initial, empty search box ... under which circumstances it leads you to ... a list old Google Doodles... Feelin' Lucky now? Guy...
- Retric 15y agoUmm, I just used it and it worked fine. List > (i am feeling lucky) = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_%28programming_language%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisp_%28programming_language%29 PS: Not everyone enables scripts.
- joe_the_user 15y agoI suppose it depends on the browser and whether you use Google instant (which is on by default). As soon as I type a letter, the "lucky" button vanishes.
- svigraham 15y agoThats funny. It has become an association at this point with Google.