3 ms·
I am surprised by the settings skepticism in this thread. By insisting that preferences/settings are indeed a design failure, many here are missing out on rela
by bhauer 5y ago
I am surprised by the settings skepticism in this thread. By insisting that preferences/settings are indeed a design failure, many here are missing out on relatively easy user delight wins. I think there is an illusory adversarial relationship between good defaults and having user-configurable settings.
Having the ability to configure settings does not need to, and indeed should not, supersede having good defaults. Windows Explorer has the ability to hide file extensions, but that should not be the default.
Instead of removing settings, some design tactics I've found useful in building software:
1. Provide multiple default settings profiles. E.g., beginner, advanced, and expert. The problem with a single, rigid configuration is that you can't satisfy all user types. On the other hand, acknowledging that not every user wants to fiddle with settings, providing a quick way to more closely match their needs via multiple default profiles is a win.
2. Always provide settings import and export, or some form of settings synchronization between instances. One of the main reasons users don't use settings is that they are exhausted by having to re-apply all of their preferences every time they install your app. I've installed Firefox about a hundred times across many computers. If I had to manually adjust it to my preferences, re-install and configure add-ons, and so on, I'd just give up and use more of the defaults. The idea of having to re-train NoScript alone is unbearable.
3. Provide better descriptions of what settings do and why they are offered. This can be inline help within the settings dialog or "show me" buttons, or whatever. A good example you're probably familiar with are video game options panels that say things like, "Enabling this may help increase framerate in the following circumstances: ..." Firefox is similarly pretty good about this. But many apps don't give the user much explanation for settings, adopting a more "if you know, you know" attitude. Don't assume that because your user is a "layperson" that they can't understand what your app's settings do if you take the time to explain them.
- max49 5y ago>The problem with a single, rigid configuration is that you can't satisfy all user types. From a user point of view, the problem is that satisfying beginners will get more click/impression/downloads/etc.. If the company is managed by accountants, you end up with products that get shittier every version.