Where the design community meets.
Saying an article is false because it has no research is the ultimate straw man. If you had any valid experience with UX you would be dissecting the rationale presented in the article and refuting them with specifics.
The argument for transparent disabled buttons is solid and strong because I provide specific experience-based rationale to back it up. Your vague complaint "it has no research" is trash. Anyone who argues without specifics has no credibility.
If it's between my experience versus your zero experience, most will go with the guy who has some experience.
It's my opinion based on years of experience working in the field with users and stakeholders. If you are skeptical about how a certain design affects users you should go do research on that. This way, you have substantial basis for your doubt instead of doubting because of "lack of research" which is no basis at all. A "lack of research" doesn't disprove a claim, only research or experience that goes against the claim does.
What you're saying when you need research to understand user behavior is that you have no experience working with users, and you're not sure if users behave this way because you probably wouldn't. If this is the case, I suggest you go get experience with actual users. You'd be surprised how a design aspect you expect them to understand throws them off. And you'd eventually learn that you are not the user and using yourself as the standard to judge how users behave is not usually accurate. Go get experience with users.
There are claims: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/toggle-switch-guidelines/
Toggle switches should take immediate effect and should not require the user to click Save or Submit to apply the new state.
You should probably study more UX and think deeper about how users interpret and perceive controls differently based on context. Just because two different controls have the same function doesn't mean they can be used willy nilly.
The guidelines you provided do not prove your case that switches and checkboxes can be used interchangeably.
You're looking at it wrong. There is no "better interface pattern," it's a matter of context and user expectations. Hope you learned something from the article.
Users expect switches to render an immediate effect when they toggle it on. However, the search filter settings don't take effect until after users press the "save" button. If there's a delayed effect due to a separate button, switches are the wrong controls to use. A switch itself is a "button" that activates state. A separate button for the switch isn't necessary.
Clarified and w/ context.
This is a negative article because it's inciting racism and division in a situation where none exists so I don't want to upvote it to give it anymore attention, but I do want to give my opinion on it.
The site in question is not being racist because they are using stock photos that are available to them. It's not their fault if the stock photo library doesn't have women of color. They also have colored people on other parts of their site.
The author's expectation that the site should have used a woman of color for their "premier" accounts is racist in itself. If the photos were reversed and the white woman was used for the "basic" account and the black woman was used for the "premier" account, this author would likely not have called out the site for racism.
Putting any one race above another is racism. Yet the author is advocating for a woman of color to be in premier over a white woman. Not only that, but the author says a "male of any color" should not be used and it should only be a woman. That's sexist because it's excluding males when the site also serves many male clients.
This author is a hypocrite because they're acting like a proponent for diversity and inclusion while being sexist and racist in their views. If they were actually for diversity they would applaud the site for using stock photos of people with different races and sexes. But this author chose not to perceive the photos in a positive light. Instead, it was perceived in a racist way that the author had to write about while pretending to be a proponent for diversity.
To answer the question: Racism in design. Who to blame? The people to blame are the ones who see racism in cases where racism don't exist. I blame people like the author.
I think you should tell us why you are asking this random question so people can understand what you want. You essentially asked: "hey guys, what do you think of puppies?" Without telling people why, you're inviting designers to a circle jerk.
Great questions, but first off I can't help but notice the great pain and suffering you are enduring from my article. You said that you're concerned about the well-being of UX designers in the world. Well, I'm concerned about your well-being. I'd like to know what specific ailments my dangerous article has caused you. If you are feeling faint or dizzy please call 911.
There's a rise of virtue signalers who masquerade as phony moral crusaders today, so I want to make sure you are not one of them. Many of these types like to compete and bash other people's accomplishments to boost their self-esteem. This is not cool and it hurts the community. We are all designers who should be supporting each others work, not competing with each other to make ourselves feel more superior than another.
Since my articles aren't very good, perhaps you could show everyone the far better articles you've written so we can see how a true guru master writes like. Please post it soon, as I'm eager to learn from you.
Even though you're couching everything in a nice way, you sound like a negative nancy complainer. Complainers say what they don't want, but never say what they want instead. This is exactly what you did. If you're not here for design tools, what are you here for?
He's not reinventing the wheel. He's making a wheel that's better than its predecessors, which I think is a great cause.
Where the design community meets.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.