4 ms·
They're getting tons of customer service calls though. Objective data always beats subjective, and the objective data here is that a bunch of customers are conf
by Someone1234 4y ago
They're getting tons of customer service calls though. Objective data always beats subjective, and the objective data here is that a bunch of customers are confused and unable to use the website.
I have no doubt that 9/10s of people reading HN would be able to figure this out if not more. But what is the figure like out in the normal/non-IT world? I miss when Microsoft had their accessibility research lab that tested stuff like this scientifically and released tons of great papers. We need more of that, I'd love for Apple to invest in stuff like that.
- masklinn 4y ago> They're getting tons of customer service calls though. Objective data always beats subjective, and the objective data here is that a bunch of customers are confused and unable to use the website. The problem is whether they're getting calls because the UI is objectively worse, or because there's an upstream selection issue: there are comments on the gist showing the UIs on other browsers are not fundamentally different, the biggest difference is that Firefox desktop makes it much clearer that the month/year is an active control, and the three desktop variants clearly allow textual input. They also indicate that their population is: > As such, most of our customers are in their 60s or older. So sounds to me the issue is not that Safari is worse than the rest (although it's no better either), but elderly generally get (or get offered) iPads for pretty obvious reasons, and so there's a huge selection bias.