Too narrow, hidden, minimal feedback…

  • LilDestructiveSheep@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Lots of people who are designing websites and webapps are just out for the design. Usability went in the background for whatever reason.

    But more and more people are getting more aware of user friendly UI and functions for people with disabilities. But yet it’s not the highest priority sadly.

    • Windex007@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      for whatever reason

      Flashy sleek shit gets invested in.

      Outside of business specifically oriented towards people with accessibility issues, the energy just doesn’t translate into VC.

      Companies who do try to shoehorn it in when products are more mature usually have:

      1. A codebase with a frustrating amount of refactoring in order to retroactively get things in line.

      2. Development inertia where it’s seen as a low value activity among developers and product owners

      3. Lack of clear guidance/tools/processes to QA new work

      4. Lack of will to retroactively identify the breadth and scope of changes you even want to make

      There is no mystery. It’s not going to get you sexy VC money at the beginning, and then it’s bizarrely more work than you’d think once your project is sufficiently large.

      • Alatain@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        That doesn’t explain why already established products are ditching things like plainly visible scroll bars in products like Microsoft word and other content viewers.

  • Boozilla@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    UX design got better and better for many years…but it has definitely been regressing over the past few years, IMO. It’s weaponized minimalism at this point. Because it “looks cool, bro”.

    It’s a variant of enshittification.

      • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, it has a very specific meaning, and people are now using it to mean “things becoming shitty”. Just because “shit” is the base word doesn’t mean that’s what the whole word means.

          • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            No, it doesn’t.

            From Wikipedia:

            Enshittification, also known as platform decay,[1] is a way to describe the pattern of decreasing quality of online platforms that act as two-sided markets.

            From the guy who coined the term itself:

            Here is how platforms die: first, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die. I call this enshittification.

            • Boozilla@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              Being a pedant is never a good look. You’re missing the larger point. The same corporate impulse that drives platform decay ripples out to things like UX design. And that impulse is: the customer doesn’t matter anymore, we already got your money, only what we want matters.