Yes, that’s awful. It’s corporate gaslighting — the new page is user-hostile in nearly every way imaginable, but it helps product managers manipulate user attention to meet our quarterly KPIs, so we’ll happily lie to your face to get you to switch.
The article is based on the assumption that upper management is just trying to throw out new UI for no reason other than to say they did something new.
The reality is these companies change the UI because some metric told them that the new design will bring in the most ad revenue with the least risk. They know most people don't care, and those that do will become apathetic. They don't care about your taste or feelings, just about the percent likelyhood you will click on an ad.
I'm not saying this to be overtly adversarial to these companies, but it is a little naive to think they 1) are just arbitrarily changing things or 2) don't know that people will hate it, but it's a calculated risk.
I don't see people in that thread being hostile - only honest. And honestly, that redesign is really bad. There's really nothing positive to say about it and although the old adage goes "don't say anything if you have nothing positive to say" I'm glad people here don't bide by it and provide useful critique instead.
Yes, clearly, probably because some buttoned-up wannabe-manager wants to impress his higher-ups my presenting them BS like "these new UI tweaks of my team increased our user retention by 26%!" so he can get a raise or a slightly higer bonus.
It's quite obvious that it's marketing and that the survey is biased towards the new UI design.
Though I'm not sure it has been intently designed like this. Hanlon's razor tells us this probably happened because of incompetence and being clueless. IMHO it reflects the survey authors bias more than a malicious intent.
I have an impression that they force at least part of those "UI upgrades", to the point of removing their switch in about:config, specifically to annoy users and to create waves pushing their product into some news while showing off some work being done. There is no such thing as negative marketing or so people say.
Personally, I found almost none of those as useful as to justify the repeatedly broken web-surfing experience and ever-growing userChrome.css.
"There’s a lot of software being produced that just doesn’t care about its users, or that manipulates them, or that turns them into the product. And this isn’t limited to social media: as a user, I can’t even book a room, order food, or click on the Windows start button without popups trying to grab my attention;"
I recently interviewed at Netflix and during the design portion of the interview I was tasked with navigating to a UI, creating a user-persona, and making arguments for or against how well the interface delivered on my goals as a user. I chose Amazon and "Parent of a family shopping for groceries". Mostly because I have a lot to say about the interface personally and I felt this would be useful in the interview.
Now it used to be that when you clicked on the account section in the top right of the interface - the page would refresh and nothing would change. I found this infuriating because the dropdown was just a hover. Turns out the interface now takes you to a landing page with the same info as the hover.
HOWEVER. During the interview, that hover (The one for Account), also advertised products to me. I mentioned that this is causing friction for me as a user, that what I want is to view my account information but I am being bombarded with more irrelevant things to buy.
The interviewer - some lead of design within the company said - "Well, you have to remember that all of these decisions are tested to death and there is good likely good reason/research to back up that part of the UI". I wish I had the presence of mind to say that response betrays the exercise we were doing but I digress.
I'm pretty sure that the big corps are changing the design based on some toxic metrics where they don't really care if we, a small demographic of power users, get annoyed all the time
That's a company that isn't going to survive and I'd probably jump ship if they were leaving the product's success to chance and on the whim product decision making. They are in for a rude awakening when competitors leverage full time UX professionals that so the user research to maintain competitive advantage. I agree you shouldn't be brazenly shaming superiors but take a step back and make the data speak for itself.
It's at least as annoying as your initial impulse said it was...more so from the people who dictate UI down to a gnat's ass in every app we submit to their store, but somehow exempt themselves from even common courtesy when it comes to designing a page. I'm typing this on a mac, but for god's sake don't make excuses for them.
The initial call to deprecate this page was quite obviously driven by usage telemetry (i.e. "engagement" metrics), rather than actually speaking to users about what they like and don't like. I suspect that companies sometimes believe they can automate their way into quality designs, by relying on analytics, rather than empathizing deeply with their customers.
I don't think they're being hostile, I think they're providing features they think people want.
Personally I hate this kind of feature and try to actively avoid products which have it, however I feel I am in a minority of general consumers in that feeling.
I find this trend particularly ironic as it has come about at the same time as an explosion in the popularity of "user-centered design". It seems like, especially on the web, more and more companies are telling themselves they care about the needs of their users, while at the same time designing more and more user-hostile experiences.
Have you considered this is due to the overarching change in the startup society as a whole? I mean, have you HAD an actual conversation with other startup founders/CEOs/early employees lately? :) Either they have nothing to say (because they're so new to the scene and probably have an IQ of around 100), or they are ubercritical (because they've seen SO many microcompanies come and go and they're still around - so everyone wants their advice).
Don't take it personally - their meaning isn't what's changed, it's their wording. Saying "I hate your UI" is essentially the same as saying, "Your UI needs to be cleaner." Look at extremely negative comments as a way to start an excellent conversation:
Them: "I hate your UI."
You: "I know! I wish it was cleaner. What do you think about this toolbar?"
If someone is willing to give you honest "I hate" or "I love" feedback, they're ASKING you to want their opinion. And it sounds like you do - so ask them something in return.
> a whole new level of the entire world trying to game their search
I think their #1 problem is their product managers trying to do "something" to add said something to their resume and making the product horrible to use in the process
Examples include:
- Grid view tab switcher in Chrome Android
- Removing dislike count on YouTube
I mean obviously users are going to cut and paste that output. It's completely hostile design in terms of usability on their part. What did you expect to happen?
reply