My complaint about site search is usually PRECISELY that it uses Google to search itself, and therefore spits up tons of irrelevant links. No, dammit, I want info from THIS SITE ONLY, otherwise why would I be using its internal search? And then the search is usually no good and I have to go off and use Google (well, DuckDuckGo) directly anyway.
"We should tell people more, because there are bigger screens now." - Really? The danger of being popular is that people trust what you say. If NNgroup says something like the statement above, UXers often take it as true without thinking twice.
I get your point and in my opinion it should be interpreted as food for thought. UX designers still need to find out if it applies to there products. Furthermore the statement is too narrow. I think a better statement would be: "We should tell people more, because there are bigger screens now. However only if you were not telling enough beforehand."
I think the idea is to show more info than we do now. It’s become very commonplace to have a lot of space, one picture and 2-3 paragraphs per page and requiring the user to scroll through all of it, which is super annoying.
Very informative. I like your categories for the metrics, e.g., annoyance vs pleasure vs no emotion; and findability vs information.
19:54 - Actually, one of my biggest bugbears is having to try to find the camouflaged search box on some sites...
People don't navigate, or search government websites. They Google "How to get an divorce in Essex county".
My complaint about site search is usually PRECISELY that it uses Google to search itself, and therefore spits up tons of irrelevant links. No, dammit, I want info from THIS SITE ONLY, otherwise why would I be using its internal search? And then the search is usually no good and I have to go off and use Google (well, DuckDuckGo) directly anyway.
"We should tell people more, because there are bigger screens now." - Really?
The danger of being popular is that people trust what you say. If NNgroup says something like the statement above, UXers often take it as true without thinking twice.
I get your point and in my opinion it should be interpreted as food for thought. UX designers still need to find out if it applies to there products. Furthermore the statement is too narrow. I think a better statement would be: "We should tell people more, because there are bigger screens now. However only if you were not telling enough beforehand."
I think the idea is to show more info than we do now. It’s become very commonplace to have a lot of space, one picture and 2-3 paragraphs per page and requiring the user to scroll through all of it, which is super annoying.
2:40