Jakob Nielsen warns us that users hate change. He recommends that “it’s best to stay with a familiar design and evolve it gradually. In the long run, however, incrementalism eventually destroys cohesiveness, calling for a new UI architecture. ”
You often hear design team members (or their management) say, “We need a fresh design.” This usually gets redesign projects off on a wrong footing, with the wrong goals and strategy.
Typically, a fresh design will be a worse design simply because it’s new and thus breaks user expectations. A better strategy is to play up familiarity and build on users’ existing knowledge of how a system works.
Let’s consider Microsoft Office. The suite was introduced in 1989 as an incremental packaging of older stand-alone apps like Word (from 1983) and Excel (from 1984). By 2000, the underlying UI architecture was 17 years old, and MS Office was creaking at the edges. I frequently complained that the old approach was a muddled set of thrown-together features — and that the ever-more complex set of menus and dialog boxes made it hard for users to find most of them.
Read Jakob Nielsen‘s Alertbox, September 21, 2009
Need help with your web writing? Click here for a Free Quote
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_b.png?x-id=7379067a-dc03-4bf3-a86b-b9b97ffe1b49)



Comments on this entry are closed.