If it looks like anything of the past then it looks like the web from 10-15 years ago pre-mass-enshittification, maybe people have forgotten what non user hostile websites look like.
Infinite scrolling is optional and also a feature the majority of users (not hyper specific tech nerds) want. If we are to have any hope of bringing the average social media user onto these platforms, we have to design it for them. Most of the addictiveness comes from the algorithm (lemmy lacks a personalized one), not necessarily the infinite scrolling itself
It prevents you from keeping track of how much you’ve read and makes the site more addictive with no significant upside, and even without that it’s worse UX when you try to go back and read something from earlier you have no idea where it is. Commercial sites still use it because they care more about keeping users on the platform than overall UX, but there’s no need for software like Lemmy to do it. Yes, dark UX is bad UX, it’s the worst kind in fact.
If it works against the user’s intention then I’d say that’s friction of another sort. For example if you go to a website and scroll more than you wanted to due to dark UX (as opposed to good content), the user may not immediately realise it’s a bad experience for them, but still they’ve wasted extra time hence the site has got in the way of what they were originally trying to achieve. It’s become normalised so it’s not always recognised.
On a personal note, I want to be able to go on Lemmy and say “OK, I’ll read the top 2 pages of my subscribed communities” and let that be it, that’s a much more reasonable way of approaching a large amount of content.
I’m sorry but the default Lemmy UI is objectively bad, it breaks so many UX principles.
Photon is good, but go to Lemmy.world and it looks like a website built in the early 90’s
If it looks like anything of the past then it looks like the web from 10-15 years ago pre-mass-enshittification, maybe people have forgotten what non user hostile websites look like.
Photon has infinite scrolling, which is horrible.
Infinite scrolling is optional and also a feature the majority of users (not hyper specific tech nerds) want. If we are to have any hope of bringing the average social media user onto these platforms, we have to design it for them. Most of the addictiveness comes from the algorithm (lemmy lacks a personalized one), not necessarily the infinite scrolling itself
Yes there’s been enshitification, but not everything has gotten worse. UI’s are much better than the past.
Why is infinite scrolling a bad UX? It saves the user from clicking next-page
You could argue that it’s dark-ux, but it’s not bad-ux
It prevents you from keeping track of how much you’ve read and makes the site more addictive with no significant upside, and even without that it’s worse UX when you try to go back and read something from earlier you have no idea where it is. Commercial sites still use it because they care more about keeping users on the platform than overall UX, but there’s no need for software like Lemmy to do it. Yes, dark UX is bad UX, it’s the worst kind in fact.
You’re describing Dark-UI
Dark-UI isn’t Bad-UX
Good UX = Easier to use, Easier to navigate, etc. Good UX makes people use your platform more because there is less friction.
If it works against the user’s intention then I’d say that’s friction of another sort. For example if you go to a website and scroll more than you wanted to due to dark UX (as opposed to good content), the user may not immediately realise it’s a bad experience for them, but still they’ve wasted extra time hence the site has got in the way of what they were originally trying to achieve. It’s become normalised so it’s not always recognised.
On a personal note, I want to be able to go on Lemmy and say “OK, I’ll read the top 2 pages of my subscribed communities” and let that be it, that’s a much more reasonable way of approaching a large amount of content.