4 ms·

The issue is when the code exists, the option exists but a fucking designer decides that say 5% of users can be screwed over because his GIANT ego says so. Exp

The issue is when the code exists, the option exists but a fucking designer decides that say 5% of users can be screwed over because his GIANT ego says so. Explain me how it makes sense, please Google the issue with Chrome, read the user issues and then figureout why this things are how they are. Don't waste your time if you don't want to be changed your mind though, the short story is; 1 users need this option, someone with a touch screen was having issue closing the tabs and he was quiting the browser 2 the code exist(and is enabled on Mac) 3 Firefox,Vivalid and other browsers have this option 4 not all Chrome/Chromium users are button licking designers or low RAM idiots that an option somewhere in about:config is too much 5 there was no UX study to support hiding this option. Sure, I will not use Chromium but you can't stop me complain when I see stupid decision made by designers or developers to satisfy their ego, so I will NOT stop complaining, Chromium UX is bad, GNOME UX is bad, you can 1 accept the criticism, yes sometimes designers/leaders are bad, see Apple reverting the keyboard changes after years of fanboys pretending Apple is perfect and users are the problem 2 ignore the criticism, probably you have better things to do then defending some random designer 3 copy/paste some shit excuse like "only 5% users use that so removing is fine" where the numbers are fake , and the rule applies selectively to only whatever the big ego designer decides to remove (other excuses are : is too much work, is too hard for our developers to maintain it, use a third party insecure extension/patch, don't use that, etc.

md8z 5y ago
I accept your criticism but I still find your comment to be unconvincing, if you have reason to believe some statistics (such as 5% users) are faked, then it would be helpful to show: 1. Evidence of that 2. Other more accurate statistics that do show it affects more than 5% of users 3. An explanation as to why 5% is a meaningful threshold. Why shouldn't it be lower? Higher? 4. Suggestions on how to reduce workload if it's too much work or it's too hard Or any other data that you think could back up the conclusion. I understand that this is not easy to do. But if it's not done, then it will continue to be a battle of egos as you describe, and that's not helpful. You don't have to stop complaining but in my experience it pays off to always improve your complaints and make sure they're done in a fully convincing manner. It also helps to avoid insults and personal comments about others, those just distract from the issue. It pays to make sure your complaints are as fact-based as possible. In a big project the original person who made the decision may not even be there anymore, so it's really everyone else that you need to convince. Edit: And please don't just show them to me, show them to the stakeholders who matter and can get things done. I may think some of your info is interesting but that's about as much as I can do, I am not the person you need to be convincing and neither are other random commenters on social media. I get that it's fun to rant on social media but the real hard work doesn't happen there.
- simion314 5y ago
  OK, so when someone says we removed X feature, or you should do X like we want because is OUR vision, then I think I do not need to bring evidence that this is EGO based and not fact based. About the percentage based excuses, there are several issues: 1 this big ego projects never shown the statistics/telemetry data so I can't prove them wrong since I am not the one that has the data. 2 it is easy to lie with statistics (or studies) so you need to keep an open mind when the source of the statistics is the big ego person and this statistic is supporting his point. 3 I bet that Chrome dev tools are used by less then 5% of users but you don't see the big ego dude removing those super complex features and moved them into a dev version of Chrome only. Why is a super small option super important for this designer person but this super complex and scary and not cool looking feature is there in the menus for a random clueless users to open? The stats are only used when the dude wants to impose his vision. Complaining is important, see Apple new laptop changes, the big ego designers forgot to do actual UX and test with real users/customers and that costed Apple a lot of time. I understand that for open source project I can't apply same demands for good UX research with real users but GNOME has the money from RedHat and it's toxic community forced it as default on distros over DEs with actual real UX research. Conclusion, I as a simple user that just tested Chromium I can't open a ticket and put in it real world data to maybe convince the big ego dudes that are wrong, I can at most put a me too there and get ignored for decades like the File Picker GNOME meme issue, and I will probably get spammed each time an upset user will add it's me too comment and the developers repeat again "you are using it wrong". But I use Chromium/Chrome as minimum as needed, I avoid GNOME and the entire Linux community social media , just the comment I responded was complaining about X and Y browser and I added the Z browser there too to complete the list, and I was salty sicne the solution is to install some "chrome extension" to fix it - it reminds me of the install a GNOME extension excuse too.
  - md8z 5y ago
    Sorry, I'm not saying that what they're saying isn't ego-based. I really don't know because I wasn't there for the conversation. What I'm saying is, the only way you can shift it from being ego-based to being fact-based is to present those facts that show the right way, or at least find a way to change the conversation into being headed in that direction. Just calling out ego-based behavior isn't enough. To me this has applied to every professional situation, it's how to keep any meeting on-track and avoid having coworkers getting into fights about egos. If you don't have the data then it's going to be hard to make a convincing argument, I don't know a good solution to this unfortunately. It requires real work and you may have to get creative. At a big company often the most convincing argument you can make is that a decision will save X amount of dollars, so you can start from there. For a volunteer open source project you will have to find out what else really motivates the developers and then go from there. Apple I think is a good example. It only mattered to Apple when it cost them a non-significant amount of resources. Ultimately they are a company and they respond to profit, if people buy or don't buy the product then that's the strongest fact that will influence them. Also I think it is a misconception that GNOME has a lot of money from Red Hat. They don't really from what I've seen, most of the Red Hat people I know are pretty strapped for time. I also have no idea what you mean by forced it as default. Distros don't have to choose it, I've seen many distros that choose other things or just don't have a default. If you mean things like Ubuntu, IIRC they chose to retire Unity and go with GNOME because Unity wasn't profitable for them. So with companies it always comes back to that... I also don't really think it is useful to call out people for imposing their vision. On a certain level, everyone who builds things is doing that. They have their point of view and that's the only thing they can express, because well, what else would they express? If they expressed your point of view all the time, then they wouldn't be themselves, they would be you. It's possible to change someone else's vision but that's usually done by presenting new information, i.e. convincing facts.
Vinnl 5y ago
I agree with you: yes, sometimes designers do a bad job. What I'm trying to say is that you then have three options: 1. Go with the flow and accept the limitations. 2. Try to fight the design. 3. Use a different product. All I'm trying to say is that 2 is a losing strategy. If the design is bad, 3 is probably your best bet. If it's good, 1 might actually be pretty rewarding and even make you embrace what you used to consider a limitation, or it might just be one of the downsides of the product since nothing is perfect. So in your case, I'd indeed use a different product and for good measure complain about it on Hacker News :) But what I probably wouldn't do is try to find some hacky workaround to make it work somewhat, until the designer screws me over again.

md8z 5y ago

I accept your criticism but I still find your comment to be unconvincing, if you have reason to believe some statistics (such as 5% users) are faked, then it would be helpful to show: 1. Evidence of that 2. Other more accurate statistics that do show it affects more than 5% of users 3. An explanation as to why 5% is a meaningful threshold. Why shouldn't it be lower? Higher? 4. Suggestions on how to reduce workload if it's too much work or it's too hard Or any other data that you think could back up the conclusion. I understand that this is not easy to do. But if it's not done, then it will continue to be a battle of egos as you describe, and that's not helpful. You don't have to stop complaining but in my experience it pays off to always improve your complaints and make sure they're done in a fully convincing manner. It also helps to avoid insults and personal comments about others, those just distract from the issue. It pays to make sure your complaints are as fact-based as possible. In a big project the original person who made the decision may not even be there anymore, so it's really everyone else that you need to convince. Edit: And please don't just show them to me, show them to the stakeholders who matter and can get things done. I may think some of your info is interesting but that's about as much as I can do, I am not the person you need to be convincing and neither are other random commenters on social media. I get that it's fun to rant on social media but the real hard work doesn't happen there.

simion314 5y ago
OK, so when someone says we removed X feature, or you should do X like we want because is OUR vision, then I think I do not need to bring evidence that this is EGO based and not fact based. About the percentage based excuses, there are several issues: 1 this big ego projects never shown the statistics/telemetry data so I can't prove them wrong since I am not the one that has the data. 2 it is easy to lie with statistics (or studies) so you need to keep an open mind when the source of the statistics is the big ego person and this statistic is supporting his point. 3 I bet that Chrome dev tools are used by less then 5% of users but you don't see the big ego dude removing those super complex features and moved them into a dev version of Chrome only. Why is a super small option super important for this designer person but this super complex and scary and not cool looking feature is there in the menus for a random clueless users to open? The stats are only used when the dude wants to impose his vision. Complaining is important, see Apple new laptop changes, the big ego designers forgot to do actual UX and test with real users/customers and that costed Apple a lot of time. I understand that for open source project I can't apply same demands for good UX research with real users but GNOME has the money from RedHat and it's toxic community forced it as default on distros over DEs with actual real UX research. Conclusion, I as a simple user that just tested Chromium I can't open a ticket and put in it real world data to maybe convince the big ego dudes that are wrong, I can at most put a me too there and get ignored for decades like the File Picker GNOME meme issue, and I will probably get spammed each time an upset user will add it's me too comment and the developers repeat again "you are using it wrong". But I use Chromium/Chrome as minimum as needed, I avoid GNOME and the entire Linux community social media , just the comment I responded was complaining about X and Y browser and I added the Z browser there too to complete the list, and I was salty sicne the solution is to install some "chrome extension" to fix it - it reminds me of the install a GNOME extension excuse too.
- md8z 5y ago
  Sorry, I'm not saying that what they're saying isn't ego-based. I really don't know because I wasn't there for the conversation. What I'm saying is, the only way you can shift it from being ego-based to being fact-based is to present those facts that show the right way, or at least find a way to change the conversation into being headed in that direction. Just calling out ego-based behavior isn't enough. To me this has applied to every professional situation, it's how to keep any meeting on-track and avoid having coworkers getting into fights about egos. If you don't have the data then it's going to be hard to make a convincing argument, I don't know a good solution to this unfortunately. It requires real work and you may have to get creative. At a big company often the most convincing argument you can make is that a decision will save X amount of dollars, so you can start from there. For a volunteer open source project you will have to find out what else really motivates the developers and then go from there. Apple I think is a good example. It only mattered to Apple when it cost them a non-significant amount of resources. Ultimately they are a company and they respond to profit, if people buy or don't buy the product then that's the strongest fact that will influence them. Also I think it is a misconception that GNOME has a lot of money from Red Hat. They don't really from what I've seen, most of the Red Hat people I know are pretty strapped for time. I also have no idea what you mean by forced it as default. Distros don't have to choose it, I've seen many distros that choose other things or just don't have a default. If you mean things like Ubuntu, IIRC they chose to retire Unity and go with GNOME because Unity wasn't profitable for them. So with companies it always comes back to that... I also don't really think it is useful to call out people for imposing their vision. On a certain level, everyone who builds things is doing that. They have their point of view and that's the only thing they can express, because well, what else would they express? If they expressed your point of view all the time, then they wouldn't be themselves, they would be you. It's possible to change someone else's vision but that's usually done by presenting new information, i.e. convincing facts.

Vinnl 5y ago

I agree with you: yes, sometimes designers do a bad job. What I'm trying to say is that you then have three options: 1. Go with the flow and accept the limitations. 2. Try to fight the design. 3. Use a different product. All I'm trying to say is that 2 is a losing strategy. If the design is bad, 3 is probably your best bet. If it's good, 1 might actually be pretty rewarding and even make you embrace what you used to consider a limitation, or it might just be one of the downsides of the product since nothing is perfect. So in your case, I'd indeed use a different product and for good measure complain about it on Hacker News :) But what I probably wouldn't do is try to find some hacky workaround to make it work somewhat, until the designer screws me over again.