Ask HN: Why is there this trend to remove/hide useful features from software?
I just got to use the Books app in Catalina and I find it almost unusable for my audiobooks. Smart lists are gone, I can't figure out how to jump to specific track, I can't find find my files in Finder anymore.
Makes me wonder why they destroyed a perfectly OK software by dumbing it down to making it pretty much useless. What are the people that make these decisions thinking?
I honestly want to know. It doesn't make sense to put effort into a rebuild only to make something less useful.
10 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 13.7 ms ] threadSteve Jobs was right : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AxZofbMGpM&t=1s
But this isn't the case; good design doesn't mean 'remove every feature except maybe three of them', nor does it mean 'hide features under layers of menus in case they scare newcomers'. It means to make the software easy to understand at a glance, and to make it so people with different use cases can get doing done.
We see the same trend in website design too. An assumption that good design means 'barely anything on screen at any one time'.
So yeah, it's due to a UX misunderstanding,
A fair criticism, but this attitude largely arose in response to kitchen sink approaches to adding features for every possible use case that was extremely common until relatively recently.
Yes, good features should be added if they help users get what they want done, but it's also fair to push back a bit, and determine whether the feature that a user asked for is really in their best interest. Thinking critically about feature creep is largely a good development.
But it's a balancing act overall. You need to know what the users will actually use and what they won't, prioritise things that more of the userbase will get some mileage out of, and move away from the idea that simple or complex is necessary better/good for any product.
But think about it; as a developer, you don't score any points for not modifying software that works great.