Re: you want to change user expectations

On 2011-08-19 15:06, Dick Cheney wrote:
> On Aug 18, 5:52 pm, David Tenser<[email protected]>  wrote:
>> On 2011-08-17 02:04, Steve wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 16, 11:07 am, Asa Dotzler<[email protected]>   wrote:
>>>> Panda wrote:
>>>>> Actually I am dissappointed that the UI team aims to change user
>>>>> expectations.
>>
>>>> I'm not really sure how to respond to this.
>>
>>>> It's my opinion that a primary role of a UI/UX designer is to make life
>>>> easier for users. If a user's expectation is that something is
>>>> difficult, and the UX folks want them to have an experience that's not
>>>> difficult, you think that's disappointing?
>>
>>>> - A
>>
>>> The argument is not about innovation.  It is about usability.  I
>>> refused the update today for very good reasons... the last two "major
>>> updates" have sorely disappointed on that front.  Unfortunately, when
>>> someone like me comes to take the time to find out why, I find that
>>> the problem is much more serious and much deeper than a simple
>>> "bug"...
>>
>> I am losing track of what this argument is about at this point. You say
>> that you refuse updates to Firefox for good reasons, implying
>> disappointments in (changed) usability.
>>
>> But the reality is, no matter what browser (or software in general) you
>> choose, you will experience changes -- even if you stay on LTS builds
>> for as long as possible, you will periodically find yourself upgrading
>> for security reasons.
>>
>> I'd like to understand what are you proposing Mozilla should do -- stop
>> trying to improve usability for the ever growing internet population for
>> the sake of maintaining status quo for the existing population? If that
>> were our philosophy for the last 12 years, the web would be very
>> stagnant and we wouldn't even have pop-up blocking today, or even tabs.
>>
>> Maybe I'm misunderstanding the points you're trying to make?
>
> Did it ever occurred to you that maybe, just maybe you should do what
> always worked for those 12 years? Everything was nice all the way to
> FF 4
>
> X.Y.Z version with Major, significant and small changes? You know, a
> sane release cycle?
>
> There is nothing wrong with some evolutionary changes once in a while.
> But random ''feature'' addition is definitively not a step forward.
>

So this is about the rapid release cycles? I wasn't sure, as the 
original post seems to talk about usability in general, and the fact 
that we have a usability team that decides which UX changes that go into 
the next release.

Could you give me an example of an evolutionary change in software as 
opposed to random feature addition? Just so I can understand what you 
mean with the above before I try to respond.

> Oh and letting your employees go around with that smug attitude aint
> helping. If somebody representing Mozilla cant stop answering in that
> condescending way to other IT professionals he should hush up.

I'm going to assume this wasn't directed towards me personally, as I 
have written nothing in this thread or any other that meant to be 
condescending. :)

Cheers,
David