My biggest pet peeve is when desktop experiences use hamburger menus as a junk drawer.
The desktop experience should have enough screen real-estate to allow for the full menu to be shown.
And it's worse when it's desktop + hamburger + only 3-4 menu items. Like, seriously?
Exactly... They made me click a dumb button to see their four measly page links.
I was looking for an example of this because I know I've seen it recently but instead I came across this: http://morrisonagency.com/
On desktop when clicking the hamburger icon you'd think it does the same transition on mobile... But you'd be wrong. Not only does the icon switch sides it also switches it's transition.
I can't even.
Some good points made.
Ours actually performs better than some other options we tried, so... ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Context. Context. Context.
yeah, I like that your hamburger menu is just an expanded list of what is already in the global nav (did some quick digging, hope you don't mind) :)
Feel like these articles need their own category badge on DN.
Don't forget the "Sketch has eaten XXXGb of my hard drive" category
Hey now, I lost 200GB to that bug and only discovered so because of one of those articles. If anything we should make one of them sticky!
Yeah... well this doesn't work either
What always comes to my mind, when reading one of these posts:
What about Android?
We can talk about alternatives and how much better a tab bar performs on iOS, but what about Android? It is the most used mobile operating system, the hamburger menu is an official interface pattern there, almost every app uses it.
I highly doubt Android users are all only using the start screen of every app on their phone ...
My guess is, even if the author is right and his arguments make perfect sense, that at some point in the not so distant future most mobile users will know what those three lines are and act accordingly.
I would have liked to have seen some quantitative evidence to present the failure of the hamburger menu. Although I agree with the sentiment, it just seems like this is a re-hashing of other articles.
I feel like we see an article with some form of "Hamburger = Bad" as the title every day.
Only two examples list statistics. One of those examples has an unlabeled Y axis, which makes me skeptical. Everything else is an un-cited "this worked well for them", "this didn't work well for them".
Facebook still use it here https://m.facebook.com/ btw
I think the point with that is that it's being used for "truly secondary items" as per the article.
I really feel like Bruno is actually saying that the navigation should match the implementation and that ill-fitting navigation kills user experience.
The "list" icon (a.k.a. hamburger) is a perfectly appropriate way to indicate a list of options lay within but more often than not it's how a designer has to deal with the fact that a client does not want to restructure their content.
I had a conversation with someone just the other day who's client wanted to make their triple layered fly out menu work on mobile. After a lot of consternation she asked me how I would go about it... Like any experienced designer I said I wouldn't; shouldn't be done even if you could; it's time to revisit the navigation and build a site that does what it's supposed to...
The title doesn't back the thesis here but what it should read is, "User Testing: Or how overburdened navigation kills conversions."
Should be "The Hamburger Menu OFTEN Never Works." There are sites I have designed that have all the major pages linked through the pages and the hamburger menu is there just to have nav all in one place and it has performed very well.
So glad someone finally dropped the mic on this. It's confusing and buries the visual guides that people want to see when they're first finding their way on a site. Great article!
I feel like the A/B test from Exis gives some nice insights on this topic aswell: http://exisweb.net/mobile-menu-abtest