Hacker News Reader

Comment by armchairhacker | Hacker News Reader

Honestly I don't think minimalism is the issue. And I love skeuomorphism, even the overdone Apple version. Minimalism is ugly but when done right, it's actually one of the clearest UXs possible: only focusing on the content and guides, no weird extras, and every design decision is meaningful because you only get a few.

Issues with today's UX are: more dark patterns, more people making apps easier (= more less experienced developers who don't understand UX), companies trying to "stand out" but hurting UX in the process (because they still want minimalism, and all of the good ways of standing out with minimalism are taken). In the author's case Android's share menu just happens to suck - he even shows Apple's menu, which is still minimalistic but actually clear.

View on HN

I think the issue is that modern interfaces are self-centered. Or rather, the designers are self-centered: they believe that the world revolves around them, and Their Magnificent Design is the One Thing that everyone will want to learn, appreciate and admire.

In reality, their design is one more thing among the hundreds or thousands of things that a user manages, and should mostly serve to get other things done.

It's more about hubris than minimalism.

That's extremely ungenerous, and no more true about designers than coders.

Perhaps some designers start out have this immature attitude, but professional designers I've worked with are user-centered, not self-centered. That's just a professional prerequisite, and what you learn in design school as well.

And in any case, you could just as easily say about programmers starting out that they too often believe "Their Magnificent Program is the One Thing" and ignore what users actually need as well.

In any case, when it does happen (to anyone), it's not hubris, just immaturity. If something seems like the best solution to you, it takes experience and perspective to realize it's not always the best solution to others. But people generally learn that fairly early on.

Yeah, the lack seems to be the lack of qualified designers in the first place. Or maybe designers who are not givens enough time to do the job.

A lot of times, the approach that the designer took is the right one, and the approach the engineer proposed is flawed when tested with real people.

Either way, a time wasn't spent to iterate on the design until it was good. Designers are good, but they make mistakes too.

> If something seems like the best solution to you, it takes experience and perspective to realize it's not always the best solution to others.

I think this is exactly the point I was making.

As a UX designer: too few companies understand the importance of UX and the difference between UX and UI. It is still too difficult to convince the stakeholders of the importance of user research, adherence to usability and accessibility guidelines, and user testing. Those activities have a cost, both in terms of money and time. But they can save a project, strongly reducing the risks of failure.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com