←back to thread

917 points cryptophreak | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
squeedles ◴[] No.45761639[source]
Good article, but the reasoning is wrong. It isn't easy to make a simple interface in the same way that Pascal apologized for writing a long letter because he didn't have time to write a shorter one.

Implementing the UI for one exact use case is not much trouble, but figuring out what that use case is difficult. And defending that use case from the line of people who want "that + this little extra thing", or the "I just need ..." is difficult. It takes a single strong-willed defender, or some sort of onerous management structure, to prevent the interface from quickly devolving back into the million options or schizming into other projects.

Simply put, it is a desirable state, but an unstable one.

replies(22): >>45761688 #>>45761787 #>>45761946 #>>45762556 #>>45763000 #>>45763132 #>>45763419 #>>45763515 #>>45764215 #>>45765589 #>>45766183 #>>45766281 #>>45768514 #>>45769691 #>>45771196 #>>45771307 #>>45771846 #>>45772026 #>>45773411 #>>45773951 #>>45776266 #>>45779651 #
dayvid ◴[] No.45761688[source]
The contributors of free software tend to be power users who want to ensure their use case works. I don't think they're investing a lot of thought into the 80/20 use case for normal/majority or users or would risk hurting their workflow to make it easier for others
replies(4): >>45761808 #>>45763689 #>>45764090 #>>45774820 #
zeroq ◴[] No.45761808[source]
> contributors of free software tend to be power users

or, simply put, nerds

it takes both a different background, approach and skillset to design ux and interface

if anything FOSS should figure out how to attract skilled artists so majority of designs and logos doesn't look so blatantly amateurish.

replies(6): >>45761885 #>>45761961 #>>45761973 #>>45763079 #>>45766506 #>>45766954 #
WD-42 ◴[] No.45761973[source]
My guess is that, as has always been, the pool of people willing to code for free on their own time because it's fun is just much larger than the people willing to make icons for software projects on their own time because they think it's fun.
replies(4): >>45762137 #>>45762256 #>>45762872 #>>45779699 #
zer00eyz ◴[] No.45762256{4}[source]
UI != icons.

UI and UX are for all intents lost arts. No one is sitting on the other side of a 2 way mirror any more and watching people use their app...

This is how we get UI's that work but suck to use. This is how we allow dark patterns to flourish. You can and will happily do things your users/customers hate if it makes a dent in the bottom of the eye and you dont have to face their criticisms directly.

replies(1): >>45762730 #
1. lamontcg ◴[] No.45762730{5}[source]
> UI and UX are for all intents lost arts. No one is sitting on the other side of a 2 way mirror any more and watching people use their app...

Which is also why UI/UX on open source projects are generally going to suck.

There's certainly no money to pay for that kind of experiment.

And if you include telemetry, people lose their goddamn minds, assuming the open source author isn't morally against it to begin with.

The result is you're just getting the author's intuitive guesswork about UI/UX design, by someone who is likely more of a coder than a design person.

replies(3): >>45764953 #>>45765835 #>>45770341 #
2. Dylan16807 ◴[] No.45764953[source]
Unless you get super invasive, telemetry will tell you how often a feature is used but I don't think it'll help much with bad and confusing layouts.
3. cwillu ◴[] No.45765835[source]
The dependency on telemetry instead of actually sitting down with a user and watching them use your software is part of the problem. No amount of screen captures, heatmaps or abandoned workflow metrics will show you the expression on a person's face.
4. imtringued ◴[] No.45770341[source]
You actually skipped over the most important part:

> You can and will happily do things your users/customers hate if ... you dont have to face their criticisms directly.

A lot of software developers can't take criticism well when it comes to their pet projects. The entire FreeCAD community, for instance, is based entirely around the idea that FreeCAD is fine and the people criticising it are wrong and have an axe to grind, when that is exactly backwards.