undefined | Better HN

0 pointspteraspidomorph9mo ago0 comments

> There is no target audience in this planet that benefits from less options or less features.

I'm currently involved in UI design and, to my frustration, adding more options or features seems to send a vocal minority of the user base into a foaming-at-the-mouth violent rage. It's like any change resets the entire contents of their brain, and it's our fault we're making things so confusing for everyone...

And let's not get started on how we're wasting time adding things that they don't personally need, and therefore no one could possibly need, ever. No, clearly by adding this sorting method, we must have directly stolen development time from the feature they want, which is a personal attack directed at them and every member of their family going three generations back.

0 comments

2 comments · 2 top-level

efreak8mo ago

> any change resets the entire contents of their brain

That's because it does. Consistency is incredibly important.

The problem isn't that you're adding a feature, the problem is that you're adding a feature in an obtrusive way. Add as many features as you like (while preserving performance), but keep the day-to-day UI as stable as you possibly can. Place entry points (buttons) for new features in menus first, and make sure they're both used frequently and by many users before moving them to a crowded toolbar (and then give good thought about where it belongs on said toolbar/menu). Don't remove features unless they're truly problematic, and don't change UI.

bmn__8mo ago

It is best to not engage with these demons.

KDE welcomes configurable complexity, Gnome deemphasises it. I am glad that broad user choice exists.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse