> You engineers do not understand the user, but we designers do.
If you got rid of the second part of that sentence, it would just be...
> You engineers do not understand the user
And they would be correct. From what the article said, it seemed the Gmail team (not just designers, the whole team) had mountains of data defending their choices. Their data proved that Gmail was becoming harder and harder for regular people to use, while engineers continued to ask for more advanced features. The only real solution was to split the interface between advanced users and normal users. As hard as it is to believe, especially in Silicon Valley, most of the people using Gmail are not engineers and do not work at Google. So while I'm not claiming that designers have all the answers, they can at least prove that this needed to be done. I would agree with them, I think most people who are going to use the web interface of Gmail are casual users and the UI changes work well for them.
Given Google's immense size, I'm very glad they're taking this approach...attempting to satisfy both the casual emailer and the power user and still providing a great service behind the scenes.
Actually that's not the case at all. Google Apps users use the "regular" Gmail as their daily email client day in and day out, and there are over 6 million of those users who pay for the right to use Gmail as their client. They're not casual users who receive 5 or 6 emails per day that are mostly promotional, they receive upwards of a hundred emails over the course of a day in running their businesses. If you look at the most popular email client in the world, Microsoft Outlook, it has tons of advanced features to satisfy power users. For Google designers to err on the side of casual users over advanced users was an error and I'm glad they were called out on it by their own staff.
Is that really not the case? Do you have inside information, do you work on gmail?
You speak with much certainty, like you work on the product. If so, I apologize. If not, then please defend your statements with supporting evidence. You present strong opinions but no reasons why we should believe what you say.
Maybe anecdotal, but I think many who use google apps for domains use a native email client -- mail.app, outlook, maybe even thunderbird. Certainly very few on iOS use the gmail ui, apps or not. Certainly I do, and most people I work with.
If you got rid of the second part of that sentence, it would just be...
> You engineers do not understand the user
And they would be correct. From what the article said, it seemed the Gmail team (not just designers, the whole team) had mountains of data defending their choices. Their data proved that Gmail was becoming harder and harder for regular people to use, while engineers continued to ask for more advanced features. The only real solution was to split the interface between advanced users and normal users. As hard as it is to believe, especially in Silicon Valley, most of the people using Gmail are not engineers and do not work at Google. So while I'm not claiming that designers have all the answers, they can at least prove that this needed to be done. I would agree with them, I think most people who are going to use the web interface of Gmail are casual users and the UI changes work well for them.
Given Google's immense size, I'm very glad they're taking this approach...attempting to satisfy both the casual emailer and the power user and still providing a great service behind the scenes.