Thread by @Kavaeric

The latest VLC update tells you via a popup that the installer will not auto-launch due to a bug, and directs you to manually launch the installer from your temp folder without giving any pointers or directions to where that might be, and if that doesn't sum up the state of FOSS

VLC is luckily a fairly benign piece of software but this same lackluster UX/UI attitude pervades through a lot of FOSS and I'd argue is one of the largest hurdles needed to be overcome to allow widespread adoption, and I don't think enough devs appreciate this

hey @Tantacrul

I have absolutely seen this and as a designer it completely frustrates me because by insisting to stick to something that's intentionally janky-looking they are, ironically, sacrificing usability for aesthetics

https://twitter.com/Tauss_srgl/status/1391918429720825858

They could've just directed the user to redownload the installer from scratch from the website. Same amount of legwork for both the devs and users, just none of this "it's in \temp\, but we're not gonna tell you where that is if you don't know already lol"

https://twitter.com/vexwerewolf/status/1391924563928305668

One of the tools you have as a designer, whether it be of furniture or water bottles or indeed software, is to do something called user profiling. It's a sort of mental exercise to get you to conceptualise the user you are targeting. Who are they and what are their wants/goals?

Let's walk through this, shall we?

Say we've decided to make a new FOSS word processor. Call it, I dunno, Libra-Office or O-Pan-Office. Just a thought. Word processors, as you might guess, are also a fairly entrenched market.

Who's our target audience?

It's probably gonna be the users who already regularly use one of two apps: Google Docs, or Microsoft Word.

Let's focus on the latter group, and I want you to take some time to picture your average Microsoft Word user in your head. Take your time.

Now, the person you're imagining is likely not /exactly/ the same as the one in my head, but I'm sure there's a lot of overlap. You're probably imagining some kind of student or office worker or even your parents.

With them in mind, let's go ahead and flesh this out a bit more.

Answer these questions:
- When they use word, what are they trying to accomplish?
- What do they feel about the current experience? What matters to them?
- What influences the way they think and feel?
- What are their pain points? What do they find frustrating/inhibiting?

Again, your answers will probably differ from mine, but I think we have some similar conclusions.

For instance, I reckon the person we're thinking of just wants to type out an essay or make a resume or a report or a flyer. Usually something basic.

For them, what they care about is probably ease of navigation (how easy it is to find obscure options they might need) and that the is easy on the eyes and isn't aesthetically imposing. Basically their ideal app is something that they don't notice is there at all.

For influences, they're used to the design language of Windows/Mac and other apps made by big corporations, and this will likely affect how they use/perceive new apps too. They want stuff that's already similar to what they use so they don't have to spend time learning stuff.

A pain point for them would be when the app leaves them in a situation that require them to ask someone for help because they don't know what to do. Mitigating instances of those would be a high priority.

Congrats, what you've done is create what's known as an Empathy Map. Do an internet search if you want to find nice templates to write this down in.

The actual process used by pro designers is of course more complicated/would have actual field research, but that's the basics.

It's an obvious tool in hindsight, but extremely powerful, as it lays bare exactly what your target user is and thus every decision you make when designing your thing can be evaluated directly against the empathy map, so you have a solid foundation to create a design direction.

Now that you've been acquainted to this tool, let's put it through its paces and see what it can tell us about the direction we can take our new FOSS word processing app.

I'm gonna ask more questions, and I want you to answer them informed by what you wrote on your empathy map.

❓ Do you think this user knows what a command line/terminal is and how to use it?

❓ Do you think this user is interested in learning how to use them if given the chance?

❓ Do you think that one of the important things to this user would be how similar this app looked/functioned to word processors from the late 90s to early 2000s?

❓ Do you think this user cares about how great the Microsoft Word forum community is, if one exists?

❓ Do you think they care about the sentimental (not functional) value of your logo design and branding?

❓ Do you think they care about Word's "corporate" look? Do you think that is something they will actively try to avoid even if it costs them familiarity?

❓ Do you think they are aware of, or have even considered what Microsoft's ethics and goals are when it comes to Word?

oh, and just for fun:

❓ Do you think this person can define what Linux, GNU, GNOME, UNIX, or Ubuntu mean?

❓ Do you think they would be willing/able to set aside hours every week to familiarise themselves with the above?

Assuming our users in mind were the same, your answers should be a straight "no" to most if not all of the questions asked above.

You understand the disconnect now?

With a simple 30-minute exercise (honestly this could probably take 15 if I didn't have to type this all out) we're able to identify what this user wants and what they do not care about. So why on earth are the priorities so backwards?

I know you love your UI that hasn't changed since 1999, but the truth of the matter is that not everyone is you. And the difference between an artist and a designer is that a designer must express on behalf of others who are not them.

Fundamentally, being a designer is an exercise of empathy. You need to care about people you've never met, who will probably never know who you are, and do not know or care about your field of work. They have their own goals; whether or not you are deemed helpful is up to you.

If a design means making something more "corporate" and therefore more intuitive and familiar to millions of users who just want to get stuff done at the expense of /your/ sentimental value, that's not their problem.

What are you gonna do, go to every office and explain to every white collar worker why you think keeping the UI the way it is is actually good and they're all just wrong?

Empathy is your strongest tool if you want to be a designer. You have to think about what other people who might not be you and will have different priorities want, and you will have to make personal sacrifices to your design for their benefit.

Given numerous forum discussions, including a particular example involving volume sliders, empathy appears to be in short supply already, and I'm not surprised that many FOSS projects end up becoming insular communities that create software that is hostile to new users.

You can't position your community as fighting for "people like you", that you're so relatable and caring unlike The Man, and then create tools that force users to sift through pages and pages of documentation and tutorials to devise its operation. Actions speak louder than words.

It's not just a matter of how aesthetic design is seen as periphery or pointless (although it is that), but about how design as a whole appears to be a total non-priority for so many of these projects, when in fact there has never been a time where it has been more crucial.

We live in a world in a deluge of information and tech, where learning is constant and necessary; where everything continues to be locked down, where corporations and systems become more hostile to users and workers, and our grasp on controlling our own lives continues to slip.

If you're not thinking about what other people who are not you want, and what they might need, and how that may conflict with your own personal tastes, then you're not designing better tools for the world, you're just coach-building custom tools for yourself.

I'm sure your tool is very useful for your specific use case, but I'm looking for someone who can help me accomplish my task as painlessly as possible, and by and large that person doesn't appear to be you right now.

this is what I mean by the attitude. In an absolute sense ultimately no one cares if you want to act self-centred but you don't then get to complain posture a position of moral superiority, and this is why "FOSS" has a negative connotation about it, because of this toxic culture

I mean, in the end, if you just want FOSS to be a fun little project with no real meaning to anyone but you, while I heavily disagree with that sentiment and see it as a complete waste of great potential, I can't stop you.

A lot of people are responding to this with "well if you're a UX/UI designer you should get involved"

The thing is many have tried, but are often sidelined or treated as unimportant or totally peripheral to the "real" work of backend programming

It's not that FOSS devs are lacking in UX/UI skills, it's that they are actively hostile to the idea of having to set aside resources and time to this area of software design.

Why would designers be anything but hesitant to contribute when they know they're not really welcome?

I find it hypocritical that a lot of people in my mentions justify this attitude because FOSS development is unpaid and voluntary, disregarding the fact that any UX designer who attempted to contribute to FOSS were themselves making the sacrifice too

No one is arguing that programming is easy and backend devs have it good, but you can't claim designers are being "disrespectful" for criticising this when the whole issue is that there has been a long-running contempt and disrespect to the importance of UX for years

Like, I don't know how much clearer I can put this, but /there are UX designers out there willing to contribute/, but the general attitude towards anyone who wants to contribute a design pass proposal is "meh, issue marked as trivial". At best. Often times, it's much more hostile

Then we're just back to square fucking one again where point-of-contact and aesthetic design is seen as an optional extra rather than something that is vital to make the backend application reach its full potential.