3 ms·

An interesting case here is Craigslist. I won’t say their UX is poor per se, but it’s very much a matter of taste that not everyone shares. Notably, the Venn di

An interesting case here is Craigslist. I won’t say their UX is poor per se, but it’s very much a matter of taste that not everyone shares. Notably, the Venn diagram of their user base and the people who vocally laud their UX is likely an enormous circle with a competitively tiny one hiding inside it (respectively). I think it’s interesting because while I personally don’t like the Craigslist UX, I have no objection to using it anyway (even if might I try other solutions first). They provide enough other value to me, and the UX is good enough, that I still have an overall positive impression of the service. I also find it interesting because the debatability of their UX is really very surface level. There are all kinds of things I wish were different, but that’s mostly because it was perfectly fine in 200* and hasn’t much changed with the times beyond a few utilitarian niceties. I’m sure this is way overly specific to CL as a reply, but your comment about UX focus resonates with me, and I’ve long found Craigslist’s lasting success fascinating in this light.

jdougan 4y ago
On the other hand, stability has value too. I can go onto CL and immediately know how I'm going to drive it, because it has been so stable. This can save a surprising amount of time.
- eyelidlessness 4y ago
  Yep this is what I meant to acknowledge. Whatever other UX complaints I might have, it’s consistent and predictable and that’s a lot of why I don’t have a problem overlooking my gripes.
twelvechairs 4y ago
Craiglist has great usability, its just aesthetically bland. Usability is generally the most important part of 'UX' though the 'UX industry' skews towards the attractiveness side (particularly latest aesthetic trends) as their input is easier to see/quantify there. The other important side is marketing/branding and in some ways craigslist has built that brand around its 'basic' interface.
- eyelidlessness 4y ago
  None of my UX complaints are about attractiveness, there are several usability difficulties for me using CL. I hope it stays brutalist and ugly and plain forever. Most of my UX complaints are about ambiguous navigation and state, which are consistent with UX from a time when web programming had those problems almost universally.
  - TeMPOraL 4y ago
    Thanks for elaborating - but to reinforce GP's point, usability and ergonomics is a huge problem on the modern web. Personally, I'm heavily positively biased to simple and old-school UIs because, despite all the things they got wrong (like the ones you mention), they hail from an era where people cared about ergonomics, or at least weren't purposefully trying to make it bad. Simple, "brutalist" design is thus a signal for me that the site is much more likely to not be actively user-hostile. Modern UI/UX zeitgeist is driven in large part by the web and mobile, which are driven by the "attention economy". The defining aspect of attention economy is that it makes money on friction. The longer it takes you to accomplish your goals, the more opportunities there is to display you ads, or upsell you something, or tire you out and make you more susceptible to be funneled to where the vendor wants you to be. The major design guidelines and UI frameworks are written and provided by advertising companies, and are focused on controlling the interaction, not empowering users. In this environment, ergonomics and good experience - meaning a tool that helps users achieve what they want as fast as possible, and gets out of the way otherwise - is actively discouraged.
- danjac 4y ago
  As with developers doing resume-driven development, designers need to build a strong portfolio to land their next gig. So aesthetics comes into building their own distinctive "brand" (as opposed to the brand of the client/company they are currently working for). That's not to say they won't justify their design in terms of what the client needs, it just pushes them away from using "boring" aesthetics - for example, pushing for a trendy-looking design for a backend admin dashboard that would have been just as usable (and cheaper) to build with a bog-standard Bootstrap theme. This isn't to blame designers, that's just the economic reality of the business.

jdougan 4y ago

On the other hand, stability has value too. I can go onto CL and immediately know how I'm going to drive it, because it has been so stable. This can save a surprising amount of time.

eyelidlessness 4y ago
Yep this is what I meant to acknowledge. Whatever other UX complaints I might have, it’s consistent and predictable and that’s a lot of why I don’t have a problem overlooking my gripes.

twelvechairs 4y ago

Craiglist has great usability, its just aesthetically bland. Usability is generally the most important part of 'UX' though the 'UX industry' skews towards the attractiveness side (particularly latest aesthetic trends) as their input is easier to see/quantify there. The other important side is marketing/branding and in some ways craigslist has built that brand around its 'basic' interface.

eyelidlessness 4y ago
None of my UX complaints are about attractiveness, there are several usability difficulties for me using CL. I hope it stays brutalist and ugly and plain forever. Most of my UX complaints are about ambiguous navigation and state, which are consistent with UX from a time when web programming had those problems almost universally.
- TeMPOraL 4y ago
  Thanks for elaborating - but to reinforce GP's point, usability and ergonomics is a huge problem on the modern web. Personally, I'm heavily positively biased to simple and old-school UIs because, despite all the things they got wrong (like the ones you mention), they hail from an era where people cared about ergonomics, or at least weren't purposefully trying to make it bad. Simple, "brutalist" design is thus a signal for me that the site is much more likely to not be actively user-hostile. Modern UI/UX zeitgeist is driven in large part by the web and mobile, which are driven by the "attention economy". The defining aspect of attention economy is that it makes money on friction. The longer it takes you to accomplish your goals, the more opportunities there is to display you ads, or upsell you something, or tire you out and make you more susceptible to be funneled to where the vendor wants you to be. The major design guidelines and UI frameworks are written and provided by advertising companies, and are focused on controlling the interaction, not empowering users. In this environment, ergonomics and good experience - meaning a tool that helps users achieve what they want as fast as possible, and gets out of the way otherwise - is actively discouraged.
danjac 4y ago
As with developers doing resume-driven development, designers need to build a strong portfolio to land their next gig. So aesthetics comes into building their own distinctive "brand" (as opposed to the brand of the client/company they are currently working for). That's not to say they won't justify their design in terms of what the client needs, it just pushes them away from using "boring" aesthetics - for example, pushing for a trendy-looking design for a backend admin dashboard that would have been just as usable (and cheaper) to build with a bog-standard Bootstrap theme. This isn't to blame designers, that's just the economic reality of the business.