Read on Twitter
There's a misunderstanding about UI and culture embedded in this sort of complaint.
The naive dream goes like this: Old program, difficult-to-learn, arbitrary feeling UI. Why couldn't they standardize and simplify? Wouldn't that be objectively better in every way? https://twitter.com/angryzenmaster/status/1294651252324929538
The naive dream goes like this: Old program, difficult-to-learn, arbitrary feeling UI. Why couldn't they standardize and simplify? Wouldn't that be objectively better in every way? https://twitter.com/angryzenmaster/status/1294651252324929538
I spent roughly a decade designing art software at one point, that last bit working on a direct (failed) competitor to Adobe Illustrator. Thousands of hours sorting menus, simplifying, gathering feedback, iterating for years.
The naive dream of 'elegant UI' was my beacon.
The naive dream of 'elegant UI' was my beacon.
What I discovered was quite humbling. The value of powerful tools rests almost entirely in abilities of knowledge, skills and passion of the people using them.
There are ten thousand ways to make vector graphics. But where do they get a community of trained artists?
There are ten thousand ways to make vector graphics. But where do they get a community of trained artists?
Data: It takes ~a decade on the market for a new art tool to find an audience of artists. The artists need to learn the tool. The tool needs many iterations to adapt to the artist's needs. A community sharing techniques and aesthetics needs to emerge. Artists need to train.
All this is the true 'cost' of a community adopting a new art tool.
These are the true pressures put on the art tool development team.
The task of "Learning the tool" is not blocked by "the keyboard shortcuts are in the wrong place"
These are the true pressures put on the art tool development team.
The task of "Learning the tool" is not blocked by "the keyboard shortcuts are in the wrong place"
It is blocked by
- Can the artist dedicate their life and make art that is the best of the best?
- Does the artist trust the tool will be around for a decade so they can invest in these skills?
- Can they share files & tips the rest of the ecosystem?
- Can the artist dedicate their life and make art that is the best of the best?
- Does the artist trust the tool will be around for a decade so they can invest in these skills?
- Can they share files & tips the rest of the ecosystem?
That community aspect creates a strong conservatism. It is nearly impossible to ask an artist who has spent a decade learning on piece of software to switch to another. Even changing a single keyboard shortcut can wreck their process.
You need to design *within the culture*.
You need to design *within the culture*.
Because forcing an 'easier UI' can be an act of *ignoring culture*.
It is naively asking someone to toss thousands of hours spent perfecting their craft.
It is naively asking someone to toss thousands of hours spent perfecting their craft.
Consider other systems of deep expertise. Like Language. You could 'simplify French'. Get rid of all those conjugations! What a horrible UI!
But you aren't going to win over the vast network that knows, appreciates and uses it. Who have dedicated their lives to it.
But you aren't going to win over the vast network that knows, appreciates and uses it. Who have dedicated their lives to it.
The lesson I took away:
Ask: Is the value that you are creating in A: that fancy technological tool?
Or is it in B: the people, community and networks that they use?
If it is later, your UI may be convoluted and be hard to learn.
But may still be effective design.
Ask: Is the value that you are creating in A: that fancy technological tool?
Or is it in B: the people, community and networks that they use?
If it is later, your UI may be convoluted and be hard to learn.
But may still be effective design.
