9 ms·

The takeaway quote: "After years of aspiring to improve software usability, I've come to the extremely humbling realization that the single best thing most com

The takeaway quote: "After years of aspiring to improve software usability, I've come to the extremely humbling realization that the single best thing most companies could do to improve usability is to stop changing the UI so often!" I wish I could ink this command onto the right hand of programmers (and program managers) everywhere.

alttab 14y ago
This. I haven't seen a good UI change in a while. If the answer to "why" is "its ugly" then run away fast.
powerslave12r 14y ago
Gmail and Google search.
jhatax 14y ago
Very few user interfaces have withstood the test of time. There are notable exceptions, of course - the iOS UI, uTorrent, and the Chrome browser immediately come to mind. Other applications and operating systems have continued to evolve their user interface over 18-24 months. In some cases, the evolution is necessary for the sake of usability. Take Android for instance: The UI update in ICS dramatically enhanced usability. In my experience, the designers of unchanged interfaces put a lot of thought into almost every interaction a user could have with their application/operating system. Armed with the use-cases, the designers invested time and effort in creating the core UI "right", and determined a seamless way to make incremental updates. Chrome and iOS are, again, perfect examples of this concept in action. Firefox, Windows (minus Metro), and earlier releases of Android - not so much. Firefox's UI changed radically in version 4. A good number of users revolted and there was uproar about the theme refresh, but most of the users that stuck around got used to the changes. That they are changing the UI again, only 24 months after the fact, does not reflect very well on the design philosophy behind the 4.0 refresh. Lots of questions come to mind - Did the designers not do adequate research during 4.0? Was the development time-frame too short? Was 4.0 just an interim solution to what they perceived a bigger problem? Are curved tabs really better than rectangular ones? Do I get back a lot of screen real estate? Is this a case of Not-Designed-By-Me syndrome?... I continue to use Firefox today, partially because I know my way around the application so well but mostly because I trust that Mozilla values my privacy. I do think that they go half the distance sometimes with their privacy measures - "Do Not Track" is unchecked by default, and Firefox accepts and keeps "Third Party Cookies" until they expire. In these specific cases, I understand that these are measures taken to ensure they can keep the lights on at their headquarters. With the impending changes to the UI, I will be using the app only on the basis of my trust in Mozilla. And we all know that trust is a tenuous thing to hang by...
- recoiledsnake 14y ago
  >Firefox, Windows (minus Metro), and earlier releases of Android - not so much. I think Windows interface has withstood the test of time pretty well. The basic UX paradigm is essentially unchanged from Windows 95 with whatever that followed basically being tweaks rather than big changes.
  - SoftwareMaven 14y ago
    Until the ribbons took over everything.
    - Bjartr 14y ago
      But only after extensive testing found them quantitatively better than the old menu system.
      - keithpeter 14y ago
        Testing with users inexperienced in both UIs or testing with users who knew pre-ribbon Office well? A reference? I find it takes a bit of time to find where functions have moved on Office 2010, and I seem to be taking a long time to internalise the 'logic' for finding less used functions. Probably all those years on Office old style.
  - Someone 14y ago
    I think that is partly in the same way roman numbers withstood the test of time: being well-known made them appear easier than they are. For example, one annoyance is the rule for what ends up in alt-tab. I work with XP at work and regularly cannot alt-tab to windows I alt-tabbed to seconds ago because they popped up some dialog (or is that only with alerts?) The rule for what ends up in the task bar also is incomprehensible for mortals. For awhile, every new release of Office managed to introduce a new variation (yes, Word is MDI, but all its windows show up separately being one variation) I guess that, if you ask users about these features, they will just say "yes, sometimes it does that".
- 14y ago
AshleysBrain 14y ago
Can't users who don't like the new-fangled UI just stay on old versions? I know that ultimately creates compatibility headaches, but it at least gives them time to decide to move along.
- snatch_backside 14y ago
  Security vulnerabilities, sir.
  - dredmorbius 14y ago
    That and websites insisting on new functionality. HTML5 and embedded video support, notably at present.

alttab 14y ago

This. I haven't seen a good UI change in a while. If the answer to "why" is "its ugly" then run away fast.

powerslave12r 14y ago

Gmail and Google search.

jhatax 14y ago

Very few user interfaces have withstood the test of time. There are notable exceptions, of course - the iOS UI, uTorrent, and the Chrome browser immediately come to mind. Other applications and operating systems have continued to evolve their user interface over 18-24 months. In some cases, the evolution is necessary for the sake of usability. Take Android for instance: The UI update in ICS dramatically enhanced usability. In my experience, the designers of unchanged interfaces put a lot of thought into almost every interaction a user could have with their application/operating system. Armed with the use-cases, the designers invested time and effort in creating the core UI "right", and determined a seamless way to make incremental updates. Chrome and iOS are, again, perfect examples of this concept in action. Firefox, Windows (minus Metro), and earlier releases of Android - not so much. Firefox's UI changed radically in version 4. A good number of users revolted and there was uproar about the theme refresh, but most of the users that stuck around got used to the changes. That they are changing the UI again, only 24 months after the fact, does not reflect very well on the design philosophy behind the 4.0 refresh. Lots of questions come to mind - Did the designers not do adequate research during 4.0? Was the development time-frame too short? Was 4.0 just an interim solution to what they perceived a bigger problem? Are curved tabs really better than rectangular ones? Do I get back a lot of screen real estate? Is this a case of Not-Designed-By-Me syndrome?... I continue to use Firefox today, partially because I know my way around the application so well but mostly because I trust that Mozilla values my privacy. I do think that they go half the distance sometimes with their privacy measures - "Do Not Track" is unchecked by default, and Firefox accepts and keeps "Third Party Cookies" until they expire. In these specific cases, I understand that these are measures taken to ensure they can keep the lights on at their headquarters. With the impending changes to the UI, I will be using the app only on the basis of my trust in Mozilla. And we all know that trust is a tenuous thing to hang by...

recoiledsnake 14y ago
>Firefox, Windows (minus Metro), and earlier releases of Android - not so much. I think Windows interface has withstood the test of time pretty well. The basic UX paradigm is essentially unchanged from Windows 95 with whatever that followed basically being tweaks rather than big changes.
- SoftwareMaven 14y ago
  Until the ribbons took over everything.
  - Bjartr 14y ago
    But only after extensive testing found them quantitatively better than the old menu system.
    - keithpeter 14y ago
      Testing with users inexperienced in both UIs or testing with users who knew pre-ribbon Office well? A reference? I find it takes a bit of time to find where functions have moved on Office 2010, and I seem to be taking a long time to internalise the 'logic' for finding less used functions. Probably all those years on Office old style.
- Someone 14y ago
  I think that is partly in the same way roman numbers withstood the test of time: being well-known made them appear easier than they are. For example, one annoyance is the rule for what ends up in alt-tab. I work with XP at work and regularly cannot alt-tab to windows I alt-tabbed to seconds ago because they popped up some dialog (or is that only with alerts?) The rule for what ends up in the task bar also is incomprehensible for mortals. For awhile, every new release of Office managed to introduce a new variation (yes, Word is MDI, but all its windows show up separately being one variation) I guess that, if you ask users about these features, they will just say "yes, sometimes it does that".
14y ago

AshleysBrain 14y ago

Can't users who don't like the new-fangled UI just stay on old versions? I know that ultimately creates compatibility headaches, but it at least gives them time to decide to move along.

snatch_backside 14y ago
Security vulnerabilities, sir.
- dredmorbius 14y ago
  That and websites insisting on new functionality. HTML5 and embedded video support, notably at present.