Personally, I’m getting used to the new interface and can’t say that it’s particularly worse or better than the old.
Then why make the change?
With Happy Cogs interface redesign for 2.5, WP hit a design zenith for myself and my users. In my opinion it was a great refinement of the simple typographic ethos (this is ‘Word’Press after all). and really set a benchmark for Blog and CMS usability. Here we are barely 8 months later and it’s being ploughed under for a committee designed hotchpotch of desktop style interface elements which leave me – and are sure to leave all of my present clients, bewildered as to how to achieve simple tasks.
Right. Maybe the [2.5] design wasn’t complex, or overtly ostentatious and “sweet-looking” with lots of nifty graphic bloat. But it was simple, clean, and usable. It was a good kind of “reset” for WordPress, and though it took a little time to get used to, it really did function pretty smoothly. This new design [2.7] has made many changes for change’s sake, it seems. It also appears to be developed with one goal in mind: feature bloat. WP Admin now appears to be on track to mirror the MS Office package online, as far as features and bloat are concerned. More is not always more.
WP has plenty of features already, adding more just because they are neat or cool does nothing useful for the writer.
You’re right. More features actually cuts down your userbase more often than it extends it.
Take some clues from Apple’s UI Guidelines, and stop trying to reinvent the wheel.
And what’s worth noting is that design has very little to do with interface. They are related like an airplane is related to gasoline. They can work together, but in many cases, they can be completely incompatible. You get the most mileage from having both be on par with high quality.
There have been some comments that the previous UI made things difficult to find too, so that is no fault of 2.7. I’ll agree. That is because there are UI challenges that cannot be fixed with any amount of design changes alone. So Otto’s comments about how there were tons of complaints about 2.5 could very well have been people expressing their frustration with the UI, not merely the design. I expect this is true.
How can you get a committee designed interface to perform better than a UI expert’s implementation? I’ll argue that you can’t. Throwing away all of the prudent and forward thinking groundwork laid by Happy Cogs was the first moment of shovel striking dirt for WordPress. If things continue to get more complicated and bloated, WordPress will eventually fail. I do not say this at all in the hope that this comes to pass. I think WordPress is the best OS software around today, and it’s mainly due to the community (both of users and contributors). I personally hope a backend change DOES happen again soon, back to a simple, powerful, feature lean interface that keeps WordPress on track to be the best open source software on the market.
WordPress – You have a lot of clout and a lot of trust. Look to the experts in INTERFACE, feature, and graphic design, and let them lead you to a better, leaner, more universal system.
I’ll state it again for impact: More features means less satisfaction, not more. Each link on a webpage is a personal recommendation from the software creator. If the user is unfamiliar or uncomfortable clicking on any of those links, they are going to feel alienated, distracted and confused. The more you can give your user exactly what they want, and cut down the “hype” features that will be unimportant long term, the better chance you have at retention.
