top | item 36703654

(no title)

plibither8 | 2 years ago

I think that's an exceptionally reductive and cynical take, without providing any real reasons for the hate, or how this update will reduce your usability of the application.

discuss

order

margalabargala|2 years ago

Tangibly, "beautiful" UX is code for "rounded corners and lots of useless buffer space in between the informative elements". This is visible in the screenshots in the link. Things are further apart, less dense, and therefore more "beautiful".

I agree that OP's take is reductive and cynical. I would add that in this case, as in essentially every other case where this is done, it is also accurate.

Karunamon|2 years ago

I think people are allowed to say they dislike the design of something without providing a academic thesis as to their reasoning.

Here is a big one for me though: the war on information density by UX designers

Have a look at the side by side comparison: https://www.thunderbird.net/en-US/thunderbird/115.0/whatsnew...

Give me the one on the right every day of the week and twice on Sunday. It looks like a professional application, a tool for getting work done. The one on the left looks like a toy website for newbies (or worse: Outlook).

I have a 32 inch 4K display and most of the designers seem to think most of that space should be filled by useless dead space and massive buttons like this is Windows 95 and the average user needs the "start" affordance (now tarted up with eye-catching bright colors!) to know what to click on. Apparently my head is expected to literally explode if I ever see two distinct lines of information separated by less than two line breaks.

This kind of infantalizing of the UI for can be defended in some contexts but here, it demonstrates that the designers do not know their target audience. This isn't the dial-up days, grandma doesn't read her mail on Outlook Express or any other local client, she uses a website like everybody else. The only people using actual local clients in 2023 are in enterprise (Outlook…) or are power users who want features they can't get on the web.

housemusicfan|2 years ago

> Give me the one on the right every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

This is such an apropos example because the left-right windshield wiper widget to switch between the two screenshots referenced, ostensibly to give me a "beautiful" "experience" because two static thumbnails is for squares, is unusable and borderline broken.

pseudalopex|2 years ago

No one asked for a thesis.

This was not part of the war on information density. The 3 column layout was requested often. It is optional. It can show more messages and more of the message on common screens. Professionals do not use 32 inch 4K displays only. Sender above subject is faster to skim in my experience. Not to you maybe. You can use the old layout.

I dislike the blue new message button. Probably CSS can fix it.

ticviking|2 years ago

The guys down at the shop aren't talkin about how pretty the snap on tools are.

Make it work. Make it easy to work with. Then make it pretty.

itishappy|2 years ago

> The guys down at the shop aren't talkin about how pretty the snap on tools are.

Got a new diamond turning lathe in the machine shop about a month ago, whew lad. Warehouse got a vertical stacker and started giving tours, lol. Our glass shop keeps the MRF machine so clean the repair techs claim we must not use it.

> Make it work. Make it easy to work with. Then make it pretty.

Any specific usability issues in mind about this 19 year old email client?

laputan_machine|2 years ago

Completely disagree. I want something that works, and works well. UX is not about being pretty, it's about being functional.

That isn't what (most) UX designers do these days, it's all about fancy animations

abenga|2 years ago

There is nothing about looking good that precludes being useful.