←back to thread

62 points grouchy | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
bccdee ◴[] No.46178688[source]
> Users get personalized interfaces without custom code.

Personalized interfaces are bad. I don't want to configure anything, and I don't want anything automatically configured on my behalf. I want it to just work; that kind of design takes effort & there's no way around it.

Your UI should be clear and predictable. A chatbot should not be moving around the buttons. If I'm going to compare notes with my friend on how to use your software, all the buttons need to be in the same place. People hate UI redesigns for a reason: Once they've learned how to use your software, they don't want to re-learn. A product that constantly redesigns itself at the whims of an inscrutable chatbot which thinks it knows what you want is the worst of all possible products.

ALSO: Egregiously written article. I assume it's made by an LLM.

replies(8): >>46178863 #>>46179118 #>>46179820 #>>46180211 #>>46180547 #>>46181428 #>>46181458 #>>46183968 #
tartoran ◴[] No.46178863[source]
Yes and this is my biggest anxiety of future software and interfaces to come. You won't remember how you got there or did what because there are n permutations of getting there or doing that, except they're vaguely similar but not exactly the same thing. I too want predictable software (including UIs) that stays the same until I want to change/upgrade it myself as a user.
replies(3): >>46180474 #>>46182051 #>>46187391 #
1. grouchy ◴[] No.46187391[source]
I understand the anxiety, but isn't this already the reality with most complex software?

Photoshop has thousands of possible panel arrangements, yet users develop their own workflows.

The question isn't whether permutations exist—it's whether the system helps you find your optimal permutation faster. Do you think the problem is unpredictability itself, or the lack of a predictable meta-pattern for how changes occur?