UX Planet

> And what's with all the flat design, we need skeumorphism and warmth back in industrial and UI design.

I’d be interested to know your general age group.

I have a theory that skeumorphism is a cross-generational design trend that serves a purpose to articulate a radical new technological paradigm in a language that makes sense to people that have never experienced it (i.e. A radio app that looks like an actual radio because that’s what everyone grew up using). I think once people are fully immersed and familiar with the tech, though, skeumorphism is limiting and ugly. We don’t need radio apps that look like radios anymore because everyone should now know how digital interfaces work. We can abstract away dials and knobs and make better use of the space for something that fits better with the constraints of a screen rather than the constraints of the physical world. This harkens back to the old discussions around the save icon and how there is an entire generation clicking an abstract symbol that holds no meaning to them while the generation prior comfortably recognized this symbol as “equivalent to archiving on my floppy disks.” Skeumorphism is really only intuitive to the first generation. Everyone that comes after just sees another (possibly ugly) abstraction that makes just as much sense as the next one. Screens don’t need metal dials, plush felts, and eye-popping gauges where a simple shadow would otherwise suffice.

I mean this with no disrespect. We all have our own…

> I'm assuming this was pre-gmail then, as they were very open about what they were doing once gmail came along

Actually, they weren't - in fact, it was after Gmail that their subtle marketing become louder that Google "does no evil" and would be a champion for your privacy. Google "reading you email" to show ads was controversial. They went to great length to try to fool us that data from their various products would never be combined and be isolated.

For example, they claimed that anyone using Google Adsense on a website wouldn't have any benefits in enhancing their presence on Google search results. But SEO's knew it long before Google themselves announced, that using Google Adsense on a website ensured that Google would crawl their website immediately.

You are right that very few of us understood the implications of what they were doing.

> I don't think iOS has ever let you have fine-grained control over what cookies are present on your device.

They did. Safari in IOS 7 had these four options for "Cookies and Website Data":

- Always Block
- Allow from current websites only
- Allow from websites I visit
- Always Allow

(Source: https://www.macobserver.com/tips/quick-tip/ios-tip-be-careful-when-blocking-safari-cookies/ )

Where as now there is only "Block All Cookies" option. Naturally, you can't enable and use that since it breaks a lot of websites. And so we have to believe Apple that their "anti-tracking" is robust and actually works, while also allowing Apple to…

Complaints about the web site itself aside, I'd like to encourage designers to exercise more restraint when applying some of these laws. Most poignant for me is the misapplication and zealous over-application of Hick's Law. If you review the detailed link provided by the site [1] you will see some commentary about when not to use Hick's law.

Personally, I would significantly expand where Hick's law should not be applied. Examine the example provided that compares two remote controls: one with a common suite of buttons, and another with a dramatically reduced set of buttons. The site seems to suggest that at the very least the stripped remote yields ratings of "better user experience" from users. I would argue that such ratings alone should not drive UX decision-making.

In my life, I have seen the trend of simplifying user interfaces chip away at functionality in virtually every interaction I have with technology, and I don't feel better for it. I really miss the opportunity to more finely control devices and applications according to my needs and wants. The most recent technological epoch—focused so much on mobile devices as it is—has been among the most pronounced with its stripping of functionality (ostensibly to make things easier to use on tiny displays).

I often feel that this law is misapplied, perhaps subconsciously as an excuse to not build more comprehensive functionality. Why build a hard button that can turn on and off Closed Captioning when you can…

> they'd choose features that majority of customers are requesting

Just an interesting Side-note: features customers REQUEST and features customers CARE ABOUT are not the same.

People are great at telling what they like or don't like when you show it to them, but they're not always great at telling you how to improve it.

I can't find the source now, but I've come across a story of a game in which players were complaining that the shotgun was too weak. The game devs solved this problem by... increasing the reload time on the sniper rifle, and the complaints went away. The players could correctly tell that there was a problem, but incorrectly diagnosed the best solution (assuming the devs were right in their decision).

Here are some random articles going over this argument in more detail:

https://www.appcues.com/blog/dont-give-users-what-they-want

https://www.nngroup.com/articles/first-rule-of-usability-dont-listen-to-users/

https://uxplanet.org/stop-asking-users-what-they-want-21e9ba646bce

1. Don't use anything Microsoft, use Figma or XD. Figma is free for individuals, and XD is part of Creative Cloud.

2. This is a good start, but if she wants to get into UX she should start by reading articles at Neilsen Norman[0], UX Planet[1], or Interaction Design

3. See #1, although frankly it pays to do wireframes on paper before even touching a mouse/trackpad.

4. I would say at this point that HTML/CSS is a "nice to have" skill. I believe that Figma now contains a basic interaction design suite (i.e. tap, swipe, scroll) that lets you go between different screens.

5. I'd say to stick with learning how/when different charts should be used rather than trying to jump into something like HighCharts or D3.

[0] https://www.nngroup.com/articles/

[1] https://uxplanet.org/

[2] https://www.interaction-design.org/literature

Ok. I'm sorry you aren't convinced.

Here are some resources to educate yourself:

https://www.nngroup.com/articles/visual-hierarchy-ux-definition/

https://xd.adobe.com/ideas/process/information-architecture/visual-hierarchy-principles-examples/

https://uxplanet.org/visual-hierarchy-and-ux-design-a-guide-779863263bbc

https://www.interaction-design.org/literature/topics/visual-hierarchy

https://guides.lib.wayne.edu/iaux

It's a field of study that has research to back it up. It's great you find that link legible, but most people would not. Even most developers would find it helpful to tweak whitespace, use headers, and layout the content a little more structured to improve legibility.