4 ms·
One persons settings are another persons feature. For example, my kids endlessly change the icons, colours, sound and many other visual and functional behaviou
by phil-martin 5y ago
One persons settings are another persons feature.
For example, my kids endlessly change the icons, colours, sound and many other visual and functional behaviour of their phones, the vast majority of which I would consider ‘settings’. But for them it’s highly important and fun
The defaults are fine for me, but changing those settings isn’t a cost to them, it’s just plain fun.
It’s easy to dismiss that as not real work, but I see the same in workplaces. Being able to customise your tools to be that little bit more bearable can sometimes be the difference between having a great day and crappy day at work. A little bit of control can feel very empowering.
- supreme_berry 5y ago
- ramoz 5y agoThis is exactly what I’ve seen with serious enterprise applications. Where users perform some complex task all day in the software. “User Preferences” are first order feature inclusions. They vary across global levels and down to specific feature settings. I’ve seen multiple occasions of customized layout/grid solutions. One random thing I’ve wondered is if Excel power users end up implementing a ton of preference customizations. Otherwise it seems like a very well equipped “default-only” UX.
- paulryanrogers 5y agoThis was true with Windows 3.1. When I finally installed it I soon bought theme packs and delighted it making it into an expression of my interests. Accessibility was also much improved over DOS and even GEM and Geoworks. Moving to OS X was such a disappointment in comparison.