3 ms·
I think this one form of a slightly more general issue which is the belief that good UX (or even "good ways of doing things" in some broader sense) should not r
by BrenBarn 2y ago
I think this one form of a slightly more general issue which is the belief that good UX (or even "good ways of doing things" in some broader sense) should not require verbal explanation. This is seen in various kinds of "streamlined" interfaces that attempt to make things "obvious" or "intuitive", but often this comes at the cost of functionality. Icons are fine if you only have a few simple things you want to do, but when you have more potential actions and/or those actions are more complex, you start to need more explanation of what you're doing and how you're doing it, and for that you need words.
- xg15 2y agoThe irony is that those UIs usually end up needing even more elaborate explanations - they just hide them away in "new feature" popups that are shown exactly once, usually at the worst possible time, then are gone forever.
- BrenBarn 2y agoYeah. Also they often wind up trading "no explanation needed for the most common use case" for "incredibly involved explanation needed for any other use case" (or even "all other use cases are unsupported").