Quotes About Users

Balance coolness, time to market and total cost of ownership. Really good technology can be adored by users of any age and remains adored even after many years in use.

My experience tells me that API users are really creative. Sometimes the API user's horizon is farther than that of the API designer. If there is a way to misuse something, users are likely to do so.

This is just another example of API users engaging in "empiric programming." They don't care about what is right or wrong, but only what works and what doesn't. Because this coding style simply used to work, API users exploited it without any problems.

WHAT DID YOU DO TO MY APP! I LIKED IT JUST HOW IT WAS! CHANGE IT BACK!" The standard playbook in software is to dismiss users like that. Hey, this is the price of progress, and progress is always good, always better. That's myopic and condescending. For many customers, better doesn't matter when comfort, consistency, and familiarity are higher up on their value chain.

It's common in the software industry to blame the users. It's the user's fault. They don't know how to use it. They're using it wrong. They need to do this or do that. But the reality is that specific designs encourage specific behaviors. If the design leads to stress, it's a bad design.

I'm trying to correct what is wrong in journalism today: wasting users' time.

We cannot choose one desktop over the other - Gnome or KDE - because there's users for both code bases.

One way to start to think about incentives is to ask four questions about a particular choice architecture: Who uses? Who chooses? Who pays? Who profits?

Some minerals—iron ore, coal—remain fixed where they are found and can be counted as property. Others—water, oil, natural gas—move underground in unknown channels, sometimes to the detriment of other potential users.

I think Facebook's biggest problem is the glut of information that Facebook's power users are overwhelmed with.

Any relationship between a building and its users is one of violence, for any use means the intrusion of a human body into a given space, the intrusion of one order into another.

Companies say they value great design. But they assume that to do great design they need a rock star designer. But great design doesn't live inside designers. It lives inside your users' heads. You get inside your users heads by doing good UX research: research that provides actionable and testable insights into users' needs.

Fundamentally, all UX research answers one of two questions: (a) Who are our users and what are they trying to do? (b) Can people use the thing we've designed to solve their problem? You answer the first question with a field visit and you answer the second question with a usability test.

Creating personas should never be your goal— understanding users' needs, goals and motivations should be your goal.

Molech swung and kicked and slaughtered Mexican food with every mighty blow, while a quarter billion extremely confused Blink users watched. And

Love was also an easy word, used carelessly. Felons and creeps could offer it coated in sugar, and users could dangle it so enticingly that you wouldn't notice that it had things attached - heavy things, things like pity and need, that were weighty as anchors and iron beams and just as impossible to get out from underneath.

Love was also an easy word, used carelessly. Felons and creeps could offer it coated in sugar, and users could dangle it so enticingly that you wouldn't notice it had things attached—heavy things, things like pity and need, that were as weighty as anchors and iron beams and just as impossible to get out from underneath.

the ultimate unit test is whether or not users want to use your application. All the other tests you write are totally irrelevant until you can get that one to pass.

Writing code? That's the easy part. Getting your application in the hands of users, and creating applications that people actually want to use—now that's the hard stuff.

Over the past four decades, much evidence has accumulated suggesting that responsiveness — a software application's ability to keep up with users and not make them wait — is the most important factor in determining user satisfaction. Not just one of the most important factors - the most important factor.

Prioritize specific business goals, customers, and users, and then their goals, before prioritizing features.

Focus on outcomes—what users need to do and see when the system comes out—and slice out releases that will get you those outcomes.

Story mapping keeps us focused on users and their experience, and the result is a better conversation, and ultimately a better product.

Stories aren't a written form of requirements; telling stories through collaboration with words and pictures is a mechanism that builds shared understanding. Stories aren't the requirements; they're discussions about solving problems for our organization, our customers, and our users that lead to agreements on what to build. Your job isn't to build more software faster: it's to maximize the outcome and impact you get from what you choose to build.