Have you ever uninstalled an app based on aesthetics?
29 comments
I recently made the same move, Lime Chat supports full-screen and is much simpler than Colloquy.
Damn, I feel like a dinosaur thinking about 'is there something apart from mIRC or pIRCh?'
Aesthetic? I haven't yet although I could see it happening assuming the better looking app had the same features and I wasn't going to lose anything by switching over.
UX however, is another story. Many well-designed apps have spent time on their user experience and it's a component of their design. Many times the "uglier" apps will have design issues that impair usability, rather than just not look as beautiful.
UX however, is another story. Many well-designed apps have spent time on their user experience and it's a component of their design. Many times the "uglier" apps will have design issues that impair usability, rather than just not look as beautiful.
All the time. If something is incredibly useful, probably not. If it's not something I depend on though, I'll get rid of it real quick.
Back in my PC/Windows days (~3 years ago) the aesthetics of all the linux distros I tried made me uninstall them. Something about the fonts just drove me crazy and I couldn't handle using them. For me, on an individual app basis, it really depends on the function. There are apps that look great but all the chrome makes a horrible UX, generally that is more likely to drive me away. The aesthetic should be at a certain level, but beyond that it's more about the UX for me.
This is just about the only thing keeping me from using a Linux distribution over OS X.
It's funny you mention that because I use both Linux and OS X but not on the same machine. I feel my Mac is too pretty to sully with as a dual booting system. I know it's nuts but that's how i am.
I'm one of those who stayed away from Linux for UI (read: ugliness) reasons. It took me a long time before I became comfortable with it. I finally stumbled on Crunchbang Limix which gave me all the great things I loved about Debian in a light system with OpenBox as the window manager. I mention this because my Linux machine still has an ugly UI but I like it. Why?
I think it's because it embraces its ugliness. It's meant to be light and fast and is all about function over form. So now my Lonux machine is used almost exclusively for getting things done. I mean really freaking working hard. I definitely get things done on my Mac but I use it for pleasure (maybe leisure) whereas the Limux is For Work Only.
I think a UI can put you in a certain mentality that affects how you work. In a world where you've got two UI's that both have equally great UX (because the two don't always exist together) the subjectively prettier UI will probably lend itself better to play time whereas the "ugly" one will get you more focused on the task at hand.
I'm one of those who stayed away from Linux for UI (read: ugliness) reasons. It took me a long time before I became comfortable with it. I finally stumbled on Crunchbang Limix which gave me all the great things I loved about Debian in a light system with OpenBox as the window manager. I mention this because my Linux machine still has an ugly UI but I like it. Why?
I think it's because it embraces its ugliness. It's meant to be light and fast and is all about function over form. So now my Lonux machine is used almost exclusively for getting things done. I mean really freaking working hard. I definitely get things done on my Mac but I use it for pleasure (maybe leisure) whereas the Limux is For Work Only.
I think a UI can put you in a certain mentality that affects how you work. In a world where you've got two UI's that both have equally great UX (because the two don't always exist together) the subjectively prettier UI will probably lend itself better to play time whereas the "ugly" one will get you more focused on the task at hand.
I often uninstall apps based on how the UI looks.
Yes.
Although most often I make initial choices that are based, partly, on aesthetics.
Poorly organized user interfaces are the chief culprit here. Bad typography is another non-favorite; especially with apps that present a lot of type that needs to be read during use.
Since I do a lot of design and development of and with graphics applications, I'm pretty particular about the appearance of things in general. I had a drawing application once that did a horrible job of rendering lines, especially curves. Bunches and knots galore. While the output looked okay at high enough resolutions, the onscreen display was a real impediment to its use. And things flickered terribly while moving elements around.
And a certain large graphics application company switched to a dark grey color scheme for a lot of their apps that's really an affront to my older, squinting eyes. The fact that their UI's organization went to hell in a hand basket was just icing on the cake.
The worse use of color that I can think of was a database editor from 25 or so years ago. I've forgotten the name, but if you got to using it too fast, changing screens, making large selections, etc., it could induce an epileptic fit faster than a Pokemon episode played at high speed.
Although most often I make initial choices that are based, partly, on aesthetics.
Poorly organized user interfaces are the chief culprit here. Bad typography is another non-favorite; especially with apps that present a lot of type that needs to be read during use.
Since I do a lot of design and development of and with graphics applications, I'm pretty particular about the appearance of things in general. I had a drawing application once that did a horrible job of rendering lines, especially curves. Bunches and knots galore. While the output looked okay at high enough resolutions, the onscreen display was a real impediment to its use. And things flickered terribly while moving elements around.
And a certain large graphics application company switched to a dark grey color scheme for a lot of their apps that's really an affront to my older, squinting eyes. The fact that their UI's organization went to hell in a hand basket was just icing on the cake.
The worse use of color that I can think of was a database editor from 25 or so years ago. I've forgotten the name, but if you got to using it too fast, changing screens, making large selections, etc., it could induce an epileptic fit faster than a Pokemon episode played at high speed.
I don't think most people can give you an accurate answer for this -- the effects of aesthetics on user retention are probably much more subtle.
Example: It's possible that altering the aesthetic of an app in some way will lead to an x% increase in the rate of uninstallation, yet none of the uninstallers would point to "aesthetics" as the reason for their uninstallation or even recognize it as one of the contributing factors.
Example: It's possible that altering the aesthetic of an app in some way will lead to an x% increase in the rate of uninstallation, yet none of the uninstallers would point to "aesthetics" as the reason for their uninstallation or even recognize it as one of the contributing factors.
Absolutely. The dissonance caused by re-implimentations of standard UI elements has caused me to uninstall many phone applications, several desktop applications, and avoid purchasing a few mainstream applications.
If you don't think the stock UI works well for your application, then you either have special needs, or are wrong. Special needs can be implemented however you like, since they're by definition not handled with standard widgets. Re-implementations of standard widgets, however, immediately stand out to me, and make using an application similar to listening to out-of-tune musicians.
If you don't think the stock UI works well for your application, then you either have special needs, or are wrong. Special needs can be implemented however you like, since they're by definition not handled with standard widgets. Re-implementations of standard widgets, however, immediately stand out to me, and make using an application similar to listening to out-of-tune musicians.
Yes. Hell, I've uninstalled apps for their icon, because they weren't useful to me at the moment and visibly offended me.
I assume that by "aesthetics" you specifically mean visual beauty. With a more general definition of "aesthetics," any time you remove an app because you don't like it would qualify.
Not necessarily an app but I remember signing up for Tagged.com because everyone was talking highly about it...but man the UI WAS HORRENDOUS so I had to delete my account.
Yes, but only with highly competitive markets, like the 4-function calculator. cough Think harder...
Absolutely.
And it goes both ways. I would have never thought I needed an app like Path, but I gave it a try when they released Path 2.0 purely because I loved the design. Now it has become one of my most used apps, super easy to keep my GF and brother/sister updated on the more personal things going on day-to-day.
And it goes both ways. I would have never thought I needed an app like Path, but I gave it a try when they released Path 2.0 purely because I loved the design. Now it has become one of my most used apps, super easy to keep my GF and brother/sister updated on the more personal things going on day-to-day.
Nope. If it does the job and isn't a pain to use, I don't care how it looks.
Really? Are you sure? I'm surprised. What if you had a choice of installing an ugly app that gets the job done then learn of another app that gets the job done just as well but is prettier? Let's say they're both free. You've never been in that situation?
Personally, I recently switched from one app to another that had less features than the first solely because of the UI. UI can actually be a feature in itself. In my case the UI was important enough for me to forego an app with several extra,museful features that I replaced with other apps in a workflow instead of an all-in-one package. I'm wondering if many people say they're all about function over form (especially developers of any kind) because it's looked at as a superficial reason by peers. Kind of like turning down a girl for a date because she's on the chubby side despite her amazing personality. You know you shouldn't be shallow so you gotta make sure you give a good excuse. Something like "I'm not quite ready to date after my last relationship" will do just fine as a face-saving reason.
Personally, I recently switched from one app to another that had less features than the first solely because of the UI. UI can actually be a feature in itself. In my case the UI was important enough for me to forego an app with several extra,museful features that I replaced with other apps in a workflow instead of an all-in-one package. I'm wondering if many people say they're all about function over form (especially developers of any kind) because it's looked at as a superficial reason by peers. Kind of like turning down a girl for a date because she's on the chubby side despite her amazing personality. You know you shouldn't be shallow so you gotta make sure you give a good excuse. Something like "I'm not quite ready to date after my last relationship" will do just fine as a face-saving reason.
With girls it's a libido thing; either she turns you on or she doesn't. It's not the same thing as choosing software.
My only concern with software is how usable it is. If it looks pretty, but I have to do a whole bunch of operations to get something done, it has a poor UI and I'll pick an alternative. If it doesn't have the flexibility to do exactly what I want, I'll look for an alternative (which is why I choose a commander-style file manager instead of the OS default). If the UI is misaligned or has some weird color scheme or ugly pictures, I really don't care so long as I can get things done quickly. I don't care enough to get nit picky about looks when it comes to software.
It's not about shallowness; it's about priorities.
My only concern with software is how usable it is. If it looks pretty, but I have to do a whole bunch of operations to get something done, it has a poor UI and I'll pick an alternative. If it doesn't have the flexibility to do exactly what I want, I'll look for an alternative (which is why I choose a commander-style file manager instead of the OS default). If the UI is misaligned or has some weird color scheme or ugly pictures, I really don't care so long as I can get things done quickly. I don't care enough to get nit picky about looks when it comes to software.
It's not about shallowness; it's about priorities.
Yes, but most of time time, I don't install apps in the first place that aren't aesthetically "adequate" for consuming scarce attention.
If you consider that your time is a scarce resource, why would anyone spend time using apps that didn't look/feel great? Unless they were objected to for their job -- but even then, there almost has to be some alternative.
If you consider that your time is a scarce resource, why would anyone spend time using apps that didn't look/feel great? Unless they were objected to for their job -- but even then, there almost has to be some alternative.
Yes. Especially if you include platform faux-pas in "aesthetics". One of the worst offenders is when someone makes something "cross platform" while ignoring all the conventions of all platforms except their primary dev platform. Generally speaking, those lead to an immediate uninstall, since they're so awful to do anything with.
I did. More often, I don't install apps that look ugly, and also avoid some companies and products for things like making aesthetically bad ads, having crappy webpages, logos, or even stupid-sounding names. It's irrational, but sometimes I won't use an app/webapp because I just hate how the name sounds.
I'm currently looking for an IRC client, and being a relatively simple app, I'm making my decision based solely on how it looks!
Yes - I went through several ugly iPad calculator apps before finding one that wasn't taxing to look at.
But... I still have Illustrator and Photoshop on my mac.
But... I still have Illustrator and Photoshop on my mac.
I can't speak to "apps" as the current mobile definition (no smartphone), but I definitely have uninstalled programs with poor interfaces.
Probably the best example for me is mp3 players. I've been using WinAmp for over a decade now, and love it. It's stylized as a widget which is exactly how I view a music player - a compact but powerful side tool. At the suggestion of friends I've made honest attempts at other players like iTunes, WMP (yes), FooBar2000, but the featureset and style of WinAmp keeps drawing me back in.
Sidenote: Are there any physical mp3 players that offer queuing for songs? Being able to hand pick the next couple songs and then let the randomizer take over when they're done is probably the greatest feature ever to me.
Probably the best example for me is mp3 players. I've been using WinAmp for over a decade now, and love it. It's stylized as a widget which is exactly how I view a music player - a compact but powerful side tool. At the suggestion of friends I've made honest attempts at other players like iTunes, WMP (yes), FooBar2000, but the featureset and style of WinAmp keeps drawing me back in.
Sidenote: Are there any physical mp3 players that offer queuing for songs? Being able to hand pick the next couple songs and then let the randomizer take over when they're done is probably the greatest feature ever to me.
As an example, I just switched from Colloquy to Lime chat as my IRC client. Colloquy matched my needs perfectly, but so does Lime... So I switched based on the UI.