Agreed. Without standards, we wouldn’t have the rich web-based ecosystem we have now.
As an example, anyone who’s coded email templates will tell you: it’s hard. While the major browsers adopted the W3C specs, email clients (I.e. email renderers) never adopted the spec, or such a W3C email HTML spec didn’t exist. So something that renders correctly in Gmail looks broken in Yahoo mail in Safari on iOS, etc.
Standards are very important, especially extensible ones where proposals are adopted when they make sense - this means companies can still innovate but users get the benefit of everything just working.
But browsers/web ecosystem are still a bad example as we had decades of browsers supporting their own particular features/extensions. This has converged slightly pretty much because everything now uses Chrome underneath (bar Safari and Firefox).
But even so...if I write an extension while using Firefox, why can't I install that extension in Chrome? And vice-versa? Even bookmarks are stored in slightly different formats.
It is a massive pain to align technology like this but the benefits are huge. Like boxing developers in with a good library (to stop them from doing arbitrary custom per-project BS) I think all software needs to be boxed into standards with provisions for extension/innovation. Rather than this pick & choose BS because muh lock-in.
Just like websites dying out, I think people back then made them as passion projects they hoped would turn into something more (or not).
I remember one I used in the early 2000s called Selida. It had this bug where it would crash randomly on save and I’d lose all of my work. I didn’t know any better and just kept using it. The end result is I had to retype my HTML so many times that it hammered it into my head until I was proficient :) This was a WYSIWYG with a code editor view (like Dreamweaver).
uhm, maybe no... data-drive in UX means sliding towards the lowest common denominator, optimizing at first for the dumbest user, then later giving in to dark patterns and quasi-scamming
there's room for creativity in UX, lots, just not at the "how does the texture of a button feel and flow" - need to move HIGHER level, towards eg thinking of experience minimizing cognitive load, increasing synergy and augmentation ppotential etc etc ...the ceiling is waaaay higher than most UX ppl think
They’re describing material design, which Google popularized. Skeuomorphism with things that could exist in the real world, avoid breaking the laws of physics, etc. Which then morphed into flat design as things like drop shadows were seen as dated. You are here.
Haha I remember that. The solution at the time for many forum admins was to simply state that anyone found to be doing that would be permabanned. Which was enough to make it stop completely, at least for the forums that I moderated. Different times indeed.
reply