3 ms·

While some of what you say is correct (e.g. about the scrolling text and the messiness in parts of the Payload site), overall your criticisms show that your vie

While some of what you say is correct (e.g. about the scrolling text and the messiness in parts of the Payload site), overall your criticisms show that your view of what's easy to follow is pretty out of sync with developers here. What you perceive as "bad" isn't really taken as bad by most others here, and I'd guess they're more likely to have positive impressions of Payload than Qbix. The Qbix Communities page is definitely cleaner and more linear than the Developers/Platform page, no doubt. But it still looks very basic and again doesn't give enough focus to specific features. Instead it presents two videos (which aren't necessarily a good way to get people interested, since they may not even click on them). And at the bottom, it has two dense columns of smaller text packed together, which doesn't really invite people to really think about the features. Would be better if the text points were spaced out, given larger header text sizes, and accompanied by representative icons or even screenshots. I also watched the first video, and the example Yang 2020 app you demonstrated also looks cluttered and squeezed due to the similar text sizing and lack of spacing things out. To me it looks like it's from 10+ years ago, before flat, material design really took hold of the mainstream and became consistent across many web apps and SPA. (Pity about Yang 2020!) Sometimes it's best to question why others are having such a contrasting response to you. It does mean something. Letting go of your own opinions and preferences can be helpful for finding greater success in a wider community. Seriously, think about getting opinions from a few UX professionals, and give them some weight when you evaluate them, even if you disagree with them.

EGreg 3y ago
I do question it. I am happy to have substantive conversations, and improve things. You may not realize it but the current site(s) other than the Development page are the result of years and hundreds of iterations with people who expressed criticism just like yours. Including professionals. And thus what you say at this point is one data point — but you can’t please everyone. People often point out problems in design aesthetics, and imagine that the opposite solution somehow can be realized in a consistent way that makes everyone love the result and will make the difference in platform usaage, but no. That’s not how it works at all. It’s like the people who say “your app doesn’t work” to a developer (with no details on a solution should be), and imagine that somehow this will lead to a much better app with no bugs that everyone will use. At the end of the day, adoption matters far more. Facebook is cluttered and ugly compared to many other clean beautiful apps, but people are super used to it. Discord is totally bewildering, with tiny gifs for flair and many controls are extremely hard to discover and operate, but people are used to where things are. Craigslist is ugly but at least it’s straightforward. Many more beautiful sites fell by the wayside as they tried to take it on (remember kajiji? others?) As for Yang 2020… your criticisms are fine but you should realize the design wasn’t ours. It was, in fact, following the design guide here since each community designs their own portal: https://cdn.hackaday.io/files/1665227124477248/Yang%20Gang%20Style%20Guide.pdf https://cdn.hackaday.io/files/1665227124477248/Yang%20Gang%2... You see, when you are designing a tool can be reused in many different environments with hundreds of variations that could go either way, and still has to work, then you realize that the design decisions aren’t so simple and that these may be the least bad after having gone through exactly the process you described. Look, if Payload’s GIANT SCROLLING TEXT and white text in black over white text on black was the unavoidable result of hundreds of iterations, then I’d accept it. I personally think there are good reasons for what we have done, having tried tons of other variations. But I don’t think the GIANT SCROLLING TEXT, or making all links look exactly like the text, is necessary or the inevitable result of iterating. We HAVE been listening to criticism and THIS is the result.

EGreg 3y ago

I do question it. I am happy to have substantive conversations, and improve things. You may not realize it but the current site(s) other than the Development page are the result of years and hundreds of iterations with people who expressed criticism just like yours. Including professionals. And thus what you say at this point is one data point — but you can’t please everyone. People often point out problems in design aesthetics, and imagine that the opposite solution somehow can be realized in a consistent way that makes everyone love the result and will make the difference in platform usaage, but no. That’s not how it works at all. It’s like the people who say “your app doesn’t work” to a developer (with no details on a solution should be), and imagine that somehow this will lead to a much better app with no bugs that everyone will use. At the end of the day, adoption matters far more. Facebook is cluttered and ugly compared to many other clean beautiful apps, but people are super used to it. Discord is totally bewildering, with tiny gifs for flair and many controls are extremely hard to discover and operate, but people are used to where things are. Craigslist is ugly but at least it’s straightforward. Many more beautiful sites fell by the wayside as they tried to take it on (remember kajiji? others?) As for Yang 2020… your criticisms are fine but you should realize the design wasn’t ours. It was, in fact, following the design guide here since each community designs their own portal: https://cdn.hackaday.io/files/1665227124477248/Yang%20Gang%20Style%20Guide.pdf https://cdn.hackaday.io/files/1665227124477248/Yang%20Gang%2... You see, when you are designing a tool can be reused in many different environments with hundreds of variations that could go either way, and still has to work, then you realize that the design decisions aren’t so simple and that these may be the least bad after having gone through exactly the process you described. Look, if Payload’s GIANT SCROLLING TEXT and white text in black over white text on black was the unavoidable result of hundreds of iterations, then I’d accept it. I personally think there are good reasons for what we have done, having tried tons of other variations. But I don’t think the GIANT SCROLLING TEXT, or making all links look exactly like the text, is necessary or the inevitable result of iterating. We HAVE been listening to criticism and THIS is the result.