Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Not sure I follow. The situations I've built appear fine during testing during development. I go to the UI, click the buttons, get the correct result. Test complete.

The type of thing I'm thinking about is when the user does that many many times in a day, but to get to the button that is on one part of the screen which is very inefficient compared to if the button was moved closer to something else so that the UX is improved. Sure, what the dev did "worked", but it might not feel clunky when you test it once or twice. That's the difference that drives most UX<=>Dev disagreements.

Dev: but it works

User: yes, but it sux using it. it can be better for us if change X, Y, Z

Dev: but it works. ticket closed

It doesn't matter if it works while everyone hates using it. I don't care what the devs think. If the user's request is reasonable, rational, and will improve the UX, stop fighting it. This situation is precisely my experience that happens when there's no designer.




I'm talking about bad designs. Grandparent mentions Figma, this is who I'm talking about.

Developers have to work on the app the whole day and they know when a design is bad for long term usage. Either by doing manual testing, or even when automating it.

UX people dictating the designs will rely on instinct even when developers complain that a design is inefficient. Or even for visual design things like excessive padding getting in the way of making the apple useable. IME, YMMV.

If you're talking about inexperienced/unemphatic developers being in charge of UX alone: well, yeah, that will happen too.


TFA is about not having a designer. If you have a bad designer, then fix that glitch.


Once again: grandparent post says "e.g. they will design a table in Figma, make it look nice", so I was answering in that context.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: