That’s assuming competence. Design that follows consumer demand requires actual research work performed by the design team.
It’s much easier for product designers to simply follow the design decisions of the “market leader. It’s what their higher-ups may even be requesting or requiring.
This pattern explains such user-hostile decisions like the loss of headphone jacks, or curved glass displays that distort edge pixels and don’t accept glass screen protectors. Or car maker’s trend to remove tactile controls with a laggy, convoluted touchscreen UX.
> This pattern explains such user-hostile decisions like the loss of headphone jacks, or curved glass displays that distort edge pixels and don’t accept glass screen protectors. Or car maker’s trend to remove tactile controls with a laggy, convoluted touchscreen UX.
Curved glass displays cause phones to break more often which sells more phones, removing headphone jacks encourages users to leave bluetooth enabled which is used for data collection and tracking. People are making money from those design choices (at our expense), but who is making money by removing tactile controls and burying their functions behind menus? The screens and OS are there either way.
That’s assuming competence. Design that follows consumer demand requires actual research work performed by the design team.
It’s much easier for product designers to simply follow the design decisions of the “market leader. It’s what their higher-ups may even be requesting or requiring.
This pattern explains such user-hostile decisions like the loss of headphone jacks, or curved glass displays that distort edge pixels and don’t accept glass screen protectors. Or car maker’s trend to remove tactile controls with a laggy, convoluted touchscreen UX.