Why would you want them in more than one order? I could maybe see putting in descending order if there are a lot of floors, but that is giving users a lot of credit for thinking before they start scrolling.

FWIW, if you are on Stripe, move to another payment processor ASAP.

I have a website that sells "stuff." One of the items, out of many thousands, was "prohibited." Instead of, you know, warning me and allowing me to remove it, they straight up nuked my ability to get paid. Spent all day yesterday trying to get this straightened out to no avail.

On to another processor, but orders aren't showing up since I'm halfway approved, but not really. I have no clue what's going on anymore. I may end up losing my business over this bull****.

what was the prohibited item?

High end soap. The prohibition is about ingredients and apparent health claims.

was it nitroglycerin soap?

I'm not entirely sure what the problem was. I know that, for example, something with Vitamin C in it isn't allowed.

"Dear Stripe:

I just got my money account shut down because I was collecting funds to send food to war refugees. Many of our donors like buy food that is Vitamin C fortified. We really didn't know, can you turn our account back on?"

I think "let's alphabetically order" is a comment added to the screen shot and probably not actually part of the design principles.

And if it was part of the design, ok, fine, the design sucks.

Possible, I'm on my phone and have old eyes...

Oh yeah lol. That was part of the design fail commentary, not on the phone. A bunch of those cracked me up. One of the best clickbaits I've ever seen.

http://www.boredpanda.com/funny-crap...ign=BPFacebook









Cinnamon bun earrings.

That makes it even more spectacular

My company is currently engaged in replacing a retail system that has thousands of installed terminals. The old UX is terribly designed, however we are forced to copy it verbatim.

Why?

Because if we change anything, a majority of the retailers will demand retraining from the operator of the terminals (our customer) and that is hugely expensive.

Not sure where the lesson in this is.

We recently had a deployment of a product acquisition flow nixed in our retail stores. The reason? Not enough time for training.

The acquisition flow is literally the same one web consumers see, just on an in-store iPad.

Wolfram's situation and others like it are why when people question executive pay they don't understand the consequences of bad ones.

interface design is hard

i'm sure we all hate it when apis get deprecated, even tho newer versions tend to have better ones

It's a valid concern. And even if the training was free, don't underestimate how much people hate change. Don't do things your customers will hate unless they ask for it.

I feel like this is the fatal flaw of most business / enterprise software I've used. They waterfall and unwrap a horrifying jack-in-the-box system and demand the end-user accept it.

During this time, those end-users, who are earning just above minimum wage are calling in constantly to let you know how bad the software sucks, is learning MS VBA to write hooks and workarounds, and in some cases, actually learning enough HTML and JavaScript to hack the site to do whatever they want.

It's strange to me. Why all this fuss about doing all-or-nothing deployments? And also, why hasn't a single one of these companies ever hired on a $10 / hr employee, pay said person $14 to move on, and have them step you through how your system is actually being used, which is night and day from how you programmed it to work.

Instead of getting amazing consultants for wicked low prices, they come back with "it's too much effort to update and retrain," so MS gets plenty more enterprise money for the next cycle of Excel, and more and more frustrated users.

Think about it, if you had said $14 / hour person, how much training would end-user really need at that point? You would have someone who knows the headache of using the system, knows tons of shocking workarounds, and has an actual pulse on what the end-users deal with. Why isn't that considered more valuable than gold?

Just something I've thought about a lot. In fact, we were talking about this at work while complaining about the trashy scheduling software they use.

What about the old UX makes it terrible?

They fell into the skeuomorphism trap. The original devs took the physical item and mapped it 100% on the UI of the terminal.

And the elements that they couldn't map directly they somehow managed to fk up too. For instance, there are tabs on the interface. But the tabs are represented as a row of buttons, marked A-F. And the row is not on the top, but on the mid lower half, with other elements below it.

There is another row on the top that looks identical to the "tab" buttons but is marked 1-5. That row is a multi-selection of systems. But it looks exactly like the "tab" buttons.

I could go on. Buttons that look like checkboxes, terrible clutter, horrible color scheme etc.

daveT,

Tbh, that seems more like a very specific rant about a terrible working situation you were in, not something that relates at all to the industry we're in.

I don't think you learned anything about how to improve the situation if you think hiring someone for near minimum wage to help you customize enterprise software is a real thing people can do.

This. Don't sell prohibited **** and then whine when they close it down. Beyond that claiming "Well I didn't know" isn't really a defense.

On the latter part, this is why I generally lol at low level engineers suggesting anything. Most have no concept of any business use case. Just cogs in the machine with no idea what they're trying to accomplish.

This sounds like every auto-repair shop terminal interface I've ever seen.

I don't think this is specific to me at all....

Yes, SalesForce is clearly used by the SalesForce team, but to be honest, 99% of the demos I've seen were outlandishly useless because it was created by people who clearly never worked in the industry they are attempting to sell to.

It's truly incredible to me how far off the mark many of these products are even in their demos, and it's surprising to me that they would never consider hiring an end-user who uses their, or similar, software. I wish I was talking about software that didn't cost $75,000 to set up, but I'm talking about software that cost $75,000 to set up. When a minimum wage person can call out the silly logical errors (and this is more common than rare), then there is some serious issues. I'd definitely suggest looking into hiring someone who uses this stuff all day if you are in their industry. They aren't afraid of change at all, they are sick of using software that isn't correctly thought through.

Again, you are trying to call out Salesforce as the source of problems, but knowing what I do of Salesforce (and I know a ****load) and of your situation. I would blame your working conditions/environment 99% and Salesforce 1%.

And 75k is not enterprise software, you were in a small business environment.

I just think the source of issues for you had nothing to do with technology, that's the easy part.

I meant to write that SalesForce was a good piece of software and was attempting to compare it to other pieces of abhorrent software. I probably wrote that out too fast. Clearly SalesForce uses their own software. Can't say that about many other companies, sadly.

If it matters, the best inventory system I ever seen was some deprecated system created in the 1990s. It wasn't possible to get this thing anymore, though a company was using it still. That system was a tank.

*****

So... Stripe nukes me, and now I'm declined by 2 more payment processors. These few days have been fun.

End users would like to see what changes? MSFT I believe spends a fair # of $ on usability studies and usability surveys believe it or not on what their customers want. How a developer views UX quality can be different than how end users view it.