5 ms·
No. Use hamburger menus where appropriate if you feel that this is the best way to offer additional options.
by Andrew_nenakhov 3y ago
No. Use hamburger menus where appropriate if you feel that this is the best way to offer additional options.
- cosmotic 3y agoIt should not be based on what YOU (the developer or designer) feels, it should be based on user research. User research shows hamburger menus are bad.
- Andrew_nenakhov 3y agoOne of the companies I own (rather smallish one) creates commercial websites. Hamburger menus work just fine according to our research and a/b testing, sometimes superior to other navigation methods, sometimes not. YMMV.
- usr1106 3y agoDoes your research and a/b testing cover users that access the site via a screen reader?
- Andrew_nenakhov 3y agoNot really, unfortunately. Very few customers require good UX with a screen reader, and we certainly can't afford the expenses necessary to research it on our own initiative. To be honest, I didn't even think about it until now, but since you mentioned it, I'll ask my design team to do a small-ish research and in the future try to build navigation better accessible for people with impaired vision. I'll hardly be a top-notch experience, but at least we'll try to pick the lowest hanging fruit.
- usr1106 3y agoI was not the first to mention it, the submitted article was.
- ddevault 3y agoI take pride in making my websites accessible for everyone regardless of the monetary incentive to do so, and to make inaccessible websites simply because you don't think there's money in it is very shameful. Not saying that hamburger menus can or cannot be accessible; just saying that, as an engineer, you really have an obligation to make something that is accessible. This is a basic, non-negotiable requirement for all software.
- cosmotic 3y agoScreen reader testing is a risk mitigation strategy. Is the team okay risking ADA law suits?
- Andrew_nenakhov 3y agoLiving in fascist Russia, ADA law suits are some the least of my concerns. ...
- usr1106 3y agoWith your honesty uncovering your HN account would be more dangerous. All the best!
- c0m 3y agoWow, I didn't realise this was a risk picking up steam. Can only imagine how frustrating the internet was for screen reader users in 2020, which probably spurred this campaign on. Info for the underinformed: https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/behavioral-competencies/global-and-cultural-effectiveness/pages/record-number-of-lawsuits-filed-over-accessibility-for-people-with-disabilities.aspx https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/behavioral-... https://www.whoisaccessible.com/guidelines/largest-web-accessibility-lawsuits/ https://www.whoisaccessible.com/guidelines/largest-web-acces...
- bluepizza 3y agoShould it be based on user research? Why? What are the advantages of basing decisions on user research? What research shows that hamburger menus are bad? Why the conclusion is this one? What makes them bad? If you are to advocate for data oriented decisions, you'd better present the data!
- hulitu 3y ago> Should it be based on user research? Why? What are the advantages of basing decisions on user research? No. Not at all. Users are the suckers who shall know from the birth what a hamburger menu presents to them. They shall have special religious skills to ask the deity what a GUI element represents: a label, a menu, a link. They shall be punished with 1 px borders on 4k screens. The windows are not meant to be resized. Users suck /s
- bluepizza 3y agoI am very confused and couldn't follow. What do you mean?
- cosmotic 3y agoI'm advocating more against designer-driven decisions. Of course UX should be based on user research.
- 3y ago
- idopmstuff 3y agoUser research doesn't show that anything is good or bad, full stop. User research shows that things are good or bad for a particular use case or audience. That's why companies have user research teams - because there are few universal principles, and it's important to understand what's best for your users in your context to achieve your objectives.
- CamperBob2 3y ago"We want faster horses." - User research conducted by Henry Ford
- anonymouskimmer 3y agoThat's bad user research. You don't ask them what they want, you ask them what individual features are helpful (e.g. "speed", in the case of Henry Ford), and you give them some product options and ask them which one they most prefer, and why. The top speed of a Model T was about 42 MPH, comparable to the fastest horses. So Ford wasn't delivering on this user request regardless. https://techhistorian.com/ford-model-t-top-speed/ https://techhistorian.com/ford-model-t-top-speed/ https://horseyhooves.com/how-fast-can-a-horse-run/ https://horseyhooves.com/how-fast-can-a-horse-run/ While horses couldn't maintain this speed for long, horses also broke down much less frequently than the earliest cars. Given what was state of the art at the time, I would believe that people would have asked for smaller trains that don't need a track, and not for "faster horses", if they'd been given the question. And this smaller, trackless train, is effectively what automotive manufacturers delivered.
- snowwrestler 3y agoUser research does not show hamburger menus are bad.
- chefandy 3y agoNielsen Norman's research does. That doesn't mean they're never the right choice, it just means it hurts your navigation so they shouldn't be your goto. Use the right tool for the job.
- snowwrestler 3y agoNNg said they caused confusion in 2016… 7 years ago. Users are familiar with them now. NNg have recommendations for how to implement them effectively. I’ll also add that NNg spent years trying to get people to adopt the “pie menu” despite clear evidence that they confuse the heck out of users. So, I’m not always inclined to take their word for things without doing my own testing.
- chefandy 3y agoI saw a NN video about vertical navigation published 6 months ago in which they recommend avoiding hamburger menus on desktop sites specifically. Whether or not a pie menu confuses users depends on the visual implementation, how it fits into the workflow, and how well it conceptually represents the users understanding for how to accomplish their goals. A few tool options for a right-click menu in a desktop application? Adding toppings to a sandwich? Maybe a great solution. Navigating a linear workflow on a website? Likely a stupid idea. Like any other common UI element, including the hamburger menu, it can be used correctly and incorrectly. Of course do your own testing – that's not a good reason to ignore other research. Beyond that, when you're doing research that few other organizions are, you're bound to get things wrong sometimes. That's fine. Modern medicine only recently discovered that peptic ulcers, which affect 1 in 10 people in their lifetime, are often caused by a treatable bacterial infection rather than poor lifestyle choices. Nobody gets it perfect. Self-correction is a sign of trustworthiness.
- bogwog 3y ago> User research shows hamburger menus are bad. (citation needed)
- chefandy 3y agohttps://www.nngroup.com/articles/hamburger-menus/ https://www.nngroup.com/articles/hamburger-menus/ Real user research should be in the context of your application flow but there is research that shows hamburger menus aren't great for users. People look at research like this and treat it like a maxim to never use hamburger menus. Sometimes it's a lazy way to avoid having to design good navigation. Sometimes it's the best of a bunch of bad choices. Overall, it's a 'use the right tool for the job' thing.