I like to think I have a bit of an eclectic background. Prior to undergrad, I was doing web design as a hobby. I also had a hobby of doing traditional art (drawing, painting) so it wasn’t a big stretch to be interested in design. However, at an internship during undergrad, I realized I really hated web design and switched into web development.

At the time, my university offered a variety of computer science majors. It was always described as a 1D-spectrum going from low-level “engineering” to high-level human-interaction to try to appeal to more potential students. (Today, this may be better described as a tree than a straight line with the addition of multiple new majors.) My undergrad degree was at the lowest level. My graduate degree was at the highest level. I did this on purpose in part because I thought it would be cool, but also because I was curious about what was at the “other end.”

Lately, I’ve been reading and experiencing a few things related to user experience (UX), which is leading to my opinion that UX is going through adolescence. It’s had its “infancy” and “childhood” in that there are now many companies looking for UX designers and there is a common expectation of their work. But it’s far from a well-established or respected position in comparison to, say, a software developer/engineer.

Part of the issue is UX is also art and not everyone will have the same taste in art. Taking a parallel from web design, if the client doesn’t like the presentation, layout, color scheme, images, etc. of a webpage, the designer is requested to fix it until the client likes it. This can be frustrating if the client can’t make up his mind and for a variety of other reasons.

In UX, the client is the user. This means there could be many users. Hundreds. Thousands. Millions. If users are complaining (think Windows 8 Metro and start menu), then the general atmosphere today is they had better well fix it. But, strangely, users are often forced to go with whatever decisions the company decides on and often the decisions are contrary to user complaints. Or, companies take a long time to get around to “listening” to their users (Windows 8 Metro is expected to get the start menu back at least 2 years after the release of Win8). Companies are taking the stance of we-know-what’s-best, much to the frustration of (often very competent) users.

Since I did my human-computer interaction (HCI) “phase” during grad school, I am under the impression that a lot of UX decisions are “researched” via feedback from user groups and other methods involving potential users. Some decisions may come from above, such as the push for Windows 8 to be touch-friendly over desktop-friendly, nevermind any viable hybrid approaches. But, if the larger share of decisions are based on user group feedback, there seems to be a flaw in picking users to observe and get feedback from. This may be in the process of getting fixed over time, but the largest flaw today is that companies don’t show they are listening or they are taking too long to show they are listening.

The following is a short list of UX “oopsies” from recent personal experience and experiences of others (either through personal interaction or from reading articles around the web):

• Windows 8 Metro – inefficient for desktop users
• Ubuntu, Gnome – attempts to be like Windows 8 Metro
• Slashdot Beta
• Google Maps on desktop – having to type “traffic” in the search bar to see the traffic map instead of having an easy, one-click button

I’ve already hit on Metro a couple of times and the Ubuntu and Gnome point are similar so I’ll skip over those. A search for these topics should also yield sufficient results for those who haven’t kept up.

Slashdot Beta is an interesting example of UX designers hopping on the best-practices in web design/UX bandwagon without really understanding (or listening to) their users. A common complaint was too much whitespace. Slashdot often represents a forum and comments on articles are a large part of the website. A lot of websites now are pushing for the minimalist look, which unfortunately means a lot of whitespace because, according to research, it makes reading easier. It also means more scrolling, which can be excessive in certain situations, such as Slashdot comments.

The interesting thing about user response to Slashdot Beta is it got so bad that by the time redirects were introduced to the public (some 25% or so of visitors) to push them to use the Beta, a weeklong boycott and request to troll the comments area about how bad the Beta is was organized to get their message through. The response from Slashdot was removing the redirect and posting a message that they were listening. However, Slashdot had been pushing at Beta for so long that their message seemed like a lie to many users and it’s possible many users took the opportunity of the boycott to properly leave the site permanently.

The tightly controlled moderation has also declined quality-wise, in my opinion, as I’ve seen a few upmodded comments that seemed out of place and some comments worthy of upmodding, but not, as well as comments being categorized (e.g., Interesting, Funny) in the wrong categories. There is a steep dropoff of Beta complaints today, but sometimes a post about Beta will reemerge. See this additional observation and response.

For a different spin on UX, Google has been notorious for pushing out strange changes (such as their Gmail inbox changes) and leaving them there, although the option to revert has often been present, but perhaps buried somewhere obscure. One such change in the works is to their GMaps application for desktop. On the phone, a user simply has to swipe from the side to bring up a variety of map options. Most useful to me is the traffic map. Two gestures: swipe, tap. On the desktop, the user has to type “traffic” in the search bar. I had to Google how to bring up the traffic map because I couldn’t find the button nor could I find any other instruction on how to get this done on the application itself. Why couldn’t the desktop application be as simple as the mobile application?

Yes, I understand that Google may be emphasizing its search engine prowess but, typing in the word “traffic” takes me longer than simply clicking on a button that can easily be put in an unobtrusive corner of the screen/map. In a similar vein, the fancy popdown windows when you type in something in that search bar and hit enter? Often obscures something I might want to look at in that area of the screen. You may not think it’s a hassle until you encounter it, see the ubiquitous X to close those windows, which, unfortunately, also clears your search parameter. I understand this design is still in the works, but designs seem to be increasingly pushed out that are half tested for usability and expect to retain the user base while at the same time getting free feedback.

The other side to this argument has a parallel with something I encountered while playing Guild Wars and other MMOs. Class balancing is a difficult job and there will always be the people who understand their class so well, they almost seem to exploit the latest changes. Sometimes, the changes are even so the more average player can seem “over-powered” (OP). This leads to whining and complaining on the official forums, which are read by developers and QA. But, the other dimension the designers and developers have to keep in mind, is just how many people are complaining and do they represent a large enough percentage of the actual players? That is, is it really a problem or is it simply something people are complaining about because there isn’t much else to complain about?

UX designers likely have run into this issue as well. The trick is determining what are the real issues and what are the more trivial problems. When user outrage reaches a peak, as with Slashdot Beta, then it is pretty clear it’s a real problem. Were there other, earlier markers? Users had been complaining about the Beta for so long that it did reach the point of boycotting, so there must have been. The Windows 8 start menu is similar – users have been asking repeatedly for its return, but Microsoft just dangled the carrot until sales showed they had to do something. (Then again, Windows OS has a pattern of good-bad-good-bad; Windows 8 is “bad.”)

I have an ambivalent opinion of UX designers. I understand, in theory, their purpose and value. However, in practicality, it seems like their craft is not quite as refined as they like to think it is, resulting in products that cause strong (often negative) emotional responses. Much like art. Except these products are not always for “pleasure” but also function, so they do not have that luxury of invoking emotions just for the sake of invoking emotions.

Perhaps UX will be rebranded as something else in the future, or perhaps it’s something to stay. But, there definitely needs to be some work in better training UX designers and integrating their work into the flow of product development to produce a product that users like and want to use, rather than a product that users use albeit grudgingly. I do acknowledge that sometimes a large enough change is necessary (like the iPhone) to progress how we interact and view our products/technology, but it must be done correctly or users will refuse to try to adjust to it.