3 ms·

I’ve enjoyed some UX PhD research seminars, and I think something needs to be said for the legitimate UX research being done. (You wouldn’t believe the thought/

I’ve enjoyed some UX PhD research seminars, and I think something needs to be said for the legitimate UX research being done. (You wouldn’t believe the thought/effort/testing that can go into the shape, color, details, etc. of a web app button.) For example: Amazon’s app structure (for their main online shopping experience) has been tested ad-infinitum by people who know what they’re doing. If you’re designing a similar shopping experience, it’s not “copying Amazon” as much as using the state of the art in shopping experience design. There’s no deductive logic that says “Facebook has spent millions on research so it’s correct”, but common sense says this isn’t a bad strategy. UX research is a legitimate undertaking, and Facebook definitely had the chops to hire people who have invested their education in understanding the nuances of when to use which design elements. It’s literally a science. UX design (I’m not speaking of other aspects of design) isn’t really a creative process as much as an engineering discipline. There’s a best way to achieve any particular outcome. Maybe taste is involved in where you hide the rubbish of your application, but the basic functionality has a “best flow”. Copying one of the giants is the best way to get this flow for the average person.

googlryas 4y ago
The Amazon shopping experience was actually heavily dictated by Jeff's personal viewpoints, with the (correctly stated) very talented UX designers only being able to operate within that space. It may be state of the art, but it doesn't mean that there aren't alternative perspectives which would be equally as successful if given a shot.
- comfypotato 4y ago
  My understanding is that part of the interview loop (for software engineers without significant UX experience) is to ask what can be improved about the UX. The correct answer (in the loop, from the perspective of the interviewers, according to my understanding) is “nothing; it’s as good as it could possibly be”. This doesn’t exactly agree with what you’re saying because there are potentially better alternatives outside of Jeff’s ideal (I’m not too worried about it as both of our positions are reasonable).
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  Amazon is one of the few UI's I don't have major gripes about, so good on him. Personally, designers SHOULD be more restricted, the problem space itself should restrict what they are able to do, but it often times isn't. At one point someone decided the shuffle button for the iphone needed to be hidden for whatever reason. I wish the designers had been restricted by someone's personal wishes during those discussions.
hsn915 4y ago
> (You wouldn’t believe the thought/effort/testing that can go into the shape, color, details, etc. of a web app button.) I beg to differ. A/B testing minutiae like the exact shade of color is not UX research; it's merely the pretense thereof. All the people doing this research are not exceptionally brilliant: this is easy to deduce by noticing how everything is getting objectively worse. > UX design (I’m not speaking of other aspects of design) isn’t really a creative process as much as an engineering discipline. Absolutely wrong. It's creative in the sense that you can't quantify it with scientific measures. UX is coming up with the iPhone when all the smart phones in your era had a small tiny screen and a 4x4 keyboard.
- comfypotato 4y ago
  Not sure if this is trolling. Please don’t be mean to me. Your comment is abrasive. I can assure you that engineering departments do in fact teach classes in which the lecture material is based on research regarding the color and other aspects of design elements. The parent discipline is “human computer interaction”, and “user experience” is a narrowing. I’ve sat through an hour long presentation about a single button used to meet an accessibility mandate in California. The presenter spent months employed with the purpose of designing the button and designing tests to ensure the correctness of the button. The size, shape, color, and sub-images of the button all contribute to its effectiveness. Coming up with the iPhone as a creative example of UX doesn’t make me wrong. It’s at the intersection of design and engineering in the same way UX scientists have to brainstorm research directions. My comment was specifically regarding the formal field of UX as a subfield of HCI, and it’s correct and relevant to the subject matter of the article in that websites and apps look the same because there is a state of the art in the engineering discipline of UX.

googlryas 4y ago

The Amazon shopping experience was actually heavily dictated by Jeff's personal viewpoints, with the (correctly stated) very talented UX designers only being able to operate within that space. It may be state of the art, but it doesn't mean that there aren't alternative perspectives which would be equally as successful if given a shot.

comfypotato 4y ago
My understanding is that part of the interview loop (for software engineers without significant UX experience) is to ask what can be improved about the UX. The correct answer (in the loop, from the perspective of the interviewers, according to my understanding) is “nothing; it’s as good as it could possibly be”. This doesn’t exactly agree with what you’re saying because there are potentially better alternatives outside of Jeff’s ideal (I’m not too worried about it as both of our positions are reasonable).
P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
Amazon is one of the few UI's I don't have major gripes about, so good on him. Personally, designers SHOULD be more restricted, the problem space itself should restrict what they are able to do, but it often times isn't. At one point someone decided the shuffle button for the iphone needed to be hidden for whatever reason. I wish the designers had been restricted by someone's personal wishes during those discussions.

hsn915 4y ago

> (You wouldn’t believe the thought/effort/testing that can go into the shape, color, details, etc. of a web app button.) I beg to differ. A/B testing minutiae like the exact shade of color is not UX research; it's merely the pretense thereof. All the people doing this research are not exceptionally brilliant: this is easy to deduce by noticing how everything is getting objectively worse. > UX design (I’m not speaking of other aspects of design) isn’t really a creative process as much as an engineering discipline. Absolutely wrong. It's creative in the sense that you can't quantify it with scientific measures. UX is coming up with the iPhone when all the smart phones in your era had a small tiny screen and a 4x4 keyboard.

comfypotato 4y ago
Not sure if this is trolling. Please don’t be mean to me. Your comment is abrasive. I can assure you that engineering departments do in fact teach classes in which the lecture material is based on research regarding the color and other aspects of design elements. The parent discipline is “human computer interaction”, and “user experience” is a narrowing. I’ve sat through an hour long presentation about a single button used to meet an accessibility mandate in California. The presenter spent months employed with the purpose of designing the button and designing tests to ensure the correctness of the button. The size, shape, color, and sub-images of the button all contribute to its effectiveness. Coming up with the iPhone as a creative example of UX doesn’t make me wrong. It’s at the intersection of design and engineering in the same way UX scientists have to brainstorm research directions. My comment was specifically regarding the formal field of UX as a subfield of HCI, and it’s correct and relevant to the subject matter of the article in that websites and apps look the same because there is a state of the art in the engineering discipline of UX.