7 ms·

I usually have deep hatred towards scroll-jacking but this was actually quite well done. Not because of the pizzazz but because it essentially put only one thi

by danr4 5y ago

I usually have deep hatred towards scroll-jacking but this was actually quite well done. Not because of the pizzazz but because it essentially put only one thing to learn on the screen at once. It was like a "getting started" section that might be slower to go through but feels like it's faster to understand.

folkrav 5y ago
I suspect the reason it's not as daunting as it usually can be is cause it doesn't feel like it's scroll-jacking you, in a sense. When you're scrolling, it still feels like you're going "downwards". You stop scrolling, animation stops in its tracks pretty quickly.
bryans 5y ago
I disagree wholeheartedly. This site breaks every UI/UX rule in the book, and in the worst ways. Instead of just letting people read the information at their own pace, they've decided to limit the information to one partial sentence at a time, and more than half of those sentences are just irrelevant jokes. Possibly even worse is the lack of snapping to the sentence, which means the user has to guess how far they need to scroll to fit the text in the available space. The text is even so large that some sentences don't fit in that space. It becomes a seemingly endless loop of reading 6 words, scrolling, reading 8 words, scrolling too far and then scrolling up, reading a 5 word joke, scrolling not far enough, etc. In fact, it's 39 mouse wheel scrolls to get to the bottom of the page, all to read one paragraph of actual information -- and that information is mostly a bunch of boisterous posturing, in order to make a pitch that amounts to a couple of prescribed patterns.
- mirzap 5y ago
  Well, on a first page without any scroll you have action buttons which leads you to the pages where you can read at your own pace. For people who don't want that they've put small bits of information on each scroll. Every information is carefully chosen, so you keep scrolling and reading. After that you go to the doc to read more. I've never seen better UI/UX that hook me in so quickly. If it was just regular page I would think "ah, just another framework" and close the tab. This is is how UI/UX should be done. Bravo!
  - bryans 5y ago
    > Well, on a first page without any scroll you have action buttons which leads you to the pages where you can read at your own pace. For people who don't want that they've put small bits of information on each scroll. You're reversing the series of events. A user visiting a page (especially a homepage) expects it to offer relevant information in an easily consumable way. It is impossible for a user to automagically intuit that they can get more easily consumable information on a separate page, just because a link to that page exists. So, what you're suggesting is that it's good UX to make the homepage so annoying that multiple pages are required to provide the same information. That's called an anti-pattern, and really makes that nearly 1MB page load (and 80kB loading gif) a complete waste of time and electricity. Even worse is that the feature information doesn't actually exist outside of the homepage, so you're making an incorrect assertion that people who don't want to scroll can instead just click a button. > Every information is carefully chosen, so you keep scrolling and reading. After that you go to the doc to read more. In this case especially, the information is the exact opposite of carefully chosen. It is chock full of jokes and irrelevant "aren't we cool" posturing, which comes across as pure "tech bro" and does a terrible job of convincing someone why they should use and trust this framework as a foundation for their product. > I've never seen better UI/UX that hook me in so quickly. If it was just regular page I would think "ah, just another framework" and close the tab. A bizarre statement. You're admitting to be willingly manipulated by style over substance, and that you have a premeditation for not actually reading a site's content unless they've met some arbitrary level of flashiness. If a project manager asked you to research frameworks, and your response was to supply them with a list of homepages that you thought "looked the coolest," you'd be fired on the spot.
    - mirzap 5y ago
      I'm really glad I'm not working with UI/UX and project managers that you think would do that. Everything you stated is just your opinion (phrases like "anti-pattern" or "bad UX", "style over substance"), and that's fine. I don't find this homepage annoying. It's the opposite. I find it very informative. I'll for sure get involved with remix thanks to the great presentation and first impression they had on me. I'm doing web development and UI/UX for some time, same as people who build this (I didn't even know who built this until now). And it checks every mark in my UI/UX book. Shared with my peers (devs, PO and designers), all think the same. Great UX.
- gherkinnn 5y ago
  Think of it as a video but you scroll through it. It’s really not that novel a concept.
  - bryans 5y ago
    I never said it was a novel concept or that the functionality is confusing. I just said that it's terrible, which it absolutely is, and your video comparison actually reinforces my point. They could have made this presentation into a 30 second video, which would have extremely simplified the access to information, while also only requiring one click, and still providing the ability to pause the flow of information when necessary. Instead, the page takes 39 manual scrolls to read through a bunch of tech bro jokes.
    - Kiro 5y ago
      That's just your opinion. I think it's awesome and if it really "breaks every UI/UX rule in the book" it's a great example of how breaking the rules can be a good thing.
      - bryans 5y ago
        I'd love to hear exactly why you think it's "awesome" and "a good thing" to force users to scroll an entire window height in order to read part of one sentence. The reality is that they could have produced this same concept in a way that doesn't force such extreme interaction to consume very minimal content, resulting in the same "awesomeness" without wasting the user's time or energy.
        Kiro 5y ago
        Sounds like you just can't accept the fact that people like it.
        archeroe 5y ago
        Sounds like you can't respond to a simple question and prefer Ad hominem. "It's awesome" has never been a proper justification.
- areeh 5y ago
  I can see how it scores poorly on the number of scrolls per paragraph of information, maximum words read per unit of time, etc, but clearly that is intended with the choice of spacing and font size which is different in the docs (typically optimized for providing information, similar to what your metrics seem to try to measure). I think it is more usefully analyzed as a landing page, with a lot of emphasis on how it looks, at the deliberate tradeoff of the text being harder to access. On the practical side, personally I'd expect to find docs, getting started, and source repo which I found immediately. Some surprises though: I didn't notice the scroll until after looking at links (intended?). The way some elements disappeared if you scrolled just slightly past them entering the page. I didn't find the scroll jacking surprising after first seeing it, I read it as "not a normal text document" shortly after. Of course you might in the end not care for the visual side, or not expect it to come at such a great expense in terms of scroll # or similar metrics. I think that's a risk they take with this kind of page. edit: typo
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
nolok 5y ago
More importantly for me, it doesn't screw with me if I don't want to do it at their rythm and scroll fast anyway. So many site with their accelerate / decelerate / transitions end up being horrible to use if you're a quick reader, theirs doesn't. I don't quite like the low information density it uses, but at least it doesn't take away my control. I prefer that a site doesn't do it at all, but if they do they should at least do it this way !
empyrical 5y ago
I love the little part with the fake Windows BSOD. The QR code is supposed to link to the documentation page on error boundaries, but sadly it's broken

by danr4 5y ago

folkrav 5y ago

I suspect the reason it's not as daunting as it usually can be is cause it doesn't feel like it's scroll-jacking you, in a sense. When you're scrolling, it still feels like you're going "downwards". You stop scrolling, animation stops in its tracks pretty quickly.

bryans 5y ago

I disagree wholeheartedly. This site breaks every UI/UX rule in the book, and in the worst ways. Instead of just letting people read the information at their own pace, they've decided to limit the information to one partial sentence at a time, and more than half of those sentences are just irrelevant jokes. Possibly even worse is the lack of snapping to the sentence, which means the user has to guess how far they need to scroll to fit the text in the available space. The text is even so large that some sentences don't fit in that space. It becomes a seemingly endless loop of reading 6 words, scrolling, reading 8 words, scrolling too far and then scrolling up, reading a 5 word joke, scrolling not far enough, etc. In fact, it's 39 mouse wheel scrolls to get to the bottom of the page, all to read one paragraph of actual information -- and that information is mostly a bunch of boisterous posturing, in order to make a pitch that amounts to a couple of prescribed patterns.

mirzap 5y ago
Well, on a first page without any scroll you have action buttons which leads you to the pages where you can read at your own pace. For people who don't want that they've put small bits of information on each scroll. Every information is carefully chosen, so you keep scrolling and reading. After that you go to the doc to read more. I've never seen better UI/UX that hook me in so quickly. If it was just regular page I would think "ah, just another framework" and close the tab. This is is how UI/UX should be done. Bravo!
- bryans 5y ago
  > Well, on a first page without any scroll you have action buttons which leads you to the pages where you can read at your own pace. For people who don't want that they've put small bits of information on each scroll. You're reversing the series of events. A user visiting a page (especially a homepage) expects it to offer relevant information in an easily consumable way. It is impossible for a user to automagically intuit that they can get more easily consumable information on a separate page, just because a link to that page exists. So, what you're suggesting is that it's good UX to make the homepage so annoying that multiple pages are required to provide the same information. That's called an anti-pattern, and really makes that nearly 1MB page load (and 80kB loading gif) a complete waste of time and electricity. Even worse is that the feature information doesn't actually exist outside of the homepage, so you're making an incorrect assertion that people who don't want to scroll can instead just click a button. > Every information is carefully chosen, so you keep scrolling and reading. After that you go to the doc to read more. In this case especially, the information is the exact opposite of carefully chosen. It is chock full of jokes and irrelevant "aren't we cool" posturing, which comes across as pure "tech bro" and does a terrible job of convincing someone why they should use and trust this framework as a foundation for their product. > I've never seen better UI/UX that hook me in so quickly. If it was just regular page I would think "ah, just another framework" and close the tab. A bizarre statement. You're admitting to be willingly manipulated by style over substance, and that you have a premeditation for not actually reading a site's content unless they've met some arbitrary level of flashiness. If a project manager asked you to research frameworks, and your response was to supply them with a list of homepages that you thought "looked the coolest," you'd be fired on the spot.
  - mirzap 5y ago
    I'm really glad I'm not working with UI/UX and project managers that you think would do that. Everything you stated is just your opinion (phrases like "anti-pattern" or "bad UX", "style over substance"), and that's fine. I don't find this homepage annoying. It's the opposite. I find it very informative. I'll for sure get involved with remix thanks to the great presentation and first impression they had on me. I'm doing web development and UI/UX for some time, same as people who build this (I didn't even know who built this until now). And it checks every mark in my UI/UX book. Shared with my peers (devs, PO and designers), all think the same. Great UX.
gherkinnn 5y ago
Think of it as a video but you scroll through it. It’s really not that novel a concept.
- bryans 5y ago
  I never said it was a novel concept or that the functionality is confusing. I just said that it's terrible, which it absolutely is, and your video comparison actually reinforces my point. They could have made this presentation into a 30 second video, which would have extremely simplified the access to information, while also only requiring one click, and still providing the ability to pause the flow of information when necessary. Instead, the page takes 39 manual scrolls to read through a bunch of tech bro jokes.
  - Kiro 5y ago
    That's just your opinion. I think it's awesome and if it really "breaks every UI/UX rule in the book" it's a great example of how breaking the rules can be a good thing.
    - bryans 5y ago
      I'd love to hear exactly why you think it's "awesome" and "a good thing" to force users to scroll an entire window height in order to read part of one sentence. The reality is that they could have produced this same concept in a way that doesn't force such extreme interaction to consume very minimal content, resulting in the same "awesomeness" without wasting the user's time or energy.
      - Kiro 5y ago
        Sounds like you just can't accept the fact that people like it.
        archeroe 5y ago
        Sounds like you can't respond to a simple question and prefer Ad hominem. "It's awesome" has never been a proper justification.
areeh 5y ago
I can see how it scores poorly on the number of scrolls per paragraph of information, maximum words read per unit of time, etc, but clearly that is intended with the choice of spacing and font size which is different in the docs (typically optimized for providing information, similar to what your metrics seem to try to measure). I think it is more usefully analyzed as a landing page, with a lot of emphasis on how it looks, at the deliberate tradeoff of the text being harder to access. On the practical side, personally I'd expect to find docs, getting started, and source repo which I found immediately. Some surprises though: I didn't notice the scroll until after looking at links (intended?). The way some elements disappeared if you scrolled just slightly past them entering the page. I didn't find the scroll jacking surprising after first seeing it, I read it as "not a normal text document" shortly after. Of course you might in the end not care for the visual side, or not expect it to come at such a great expense in terms of scroll # or similar metrics. I think that's a risk they take with this kind of page. edit: typo
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

nolok 5y ago

More importantly for me, it doesn't screw with me if I don't want to do it at their rythm and scroll fast anyway. So many site with their accelerate / decelerate / transitions end up being horrible to use if you're a quick reader, theirs doesn't. I don't quite like the low information density it uses, but at least it doesn't take away my control. I prefer that a site doesn't do it at all, but if they do they should at least do it this way !

empyrical 5y ago

I love the little part with the fake Windows BSOD. The QR code is supposed to link to the documentation page on error boundaries, but sadly it's broken