Loading...
Answers
MenuI've been hearing a lot of buzz around card based UIs lately. Has anyone implemented something similar in their product recently. Pros and cons?
This question has no further details.
Answers
One of our clients went with a card-based approach (http://purelyapp.com). The reasons were:
- People understand them. The separation and spacing lead to very little cognitive overhead.
- Perfect for responsive layouts, and translate easily to native mobile devices.
- Forces you to discriminate - you can't cram too much information in a card (at some point it ceases being a card), so it provides a nice constraint and keeps your product simpler.
- Easier to A/B test. Cards are a great example of what Andrew Chen has called an 'open system'. Many layouts are just loops of cards, which means making changes to a card object is trivial vs. changing the layout of a less modular, more structured page.
Hope that helps!
Yes, I've implemented the card based UI in a mobile app. In our particular case, cards work very well as we want the user to be forced to make a decision in the information we're presenting them but that kind of cognitive load is not something that all apps can or should be able to justify.
Implementing cards as a UX does force a lot of constraints if you're going to do it well but without knowing more about what you're designing, it's hard to give a helpful answer.
Happy to talk to you in a brief call and provide you some more contextually-relevant feedback.
What does a card really do?
- It helps clearly group information
- It helps group information with relevant tasks
- It can help to show quantity of information according to need
- It can help show other aspects of information normally not seen upfront
There are several ways to group information as per the need of the users and brand. Graphic designers and user experience designers have been grouping information as a part of their job.
In the recent times, a lot of people needed to group and categorise information. However, without the knowledge of Gestalt's Laws and training in graphic design, it is a guessing game for anyone. At that time, card based UIs came to rescue - they did the job perfectly - and looked good too!
So, if you and your designers have zero training in graphic design, and you have an information heavy website/application, card based UIs can be good.
And, one word of caution, group information that makes sense to users together (even if it comes from different database tables). Do not naturally group information that are columns in the same table in the database!
Related Questions
-
What's your opinion on using something like usertesting.com vs. real time usability testing (online and offline)?
UserTesting can be instructive in terms of understanding whether people understand your copy, CTAs, and intended flows but generally, I've found the quality of their panels to be pretty low. You're almost always getting people who are not your actual users, so the feedback can only be generally applied as above. I find whatever web analytics package or packages you're using are generally able to provide much better insights. I also really do believe in *real* user panels. Buying pizza or offering small financial incentives to real users to click through new flows where they are talking out loud or answering specific questions is going to give far more actionable insights than anything else. What I like to do is take my best guesses as to what's not working or what I'm looking to improve and then discover/validate via real in-person customer panels. Happy to talk through this in more detail with you in a call.TW
-
How can i find a really good UI/UX designer to create my web application ?
Go onto https://dribbble.com and scour the place for quality design work. Once you've found some great pieces, look at what else those designers have done. If their portfolio fits well with your requirements, contact those designers and tell them about your project. Avoid sites like 99designs.com and oDesk in my opinion.DH
-
What would you do if you were a Solo-Founder with a limited network, and no funding as of right now to recruit a top UX designer?
I think you've really answered your question pretty well! The common options are: 1) Deferred compensation. Find someone that will agree to take a note in lieu of payment, with an enticing arrangement to pay them for their work when you get revenue. 2) Partial cash, partial equity. Equity doesn't have to mean a share in the company today. It could take the form of options (with vesting over time), or vesting that is dependent on certain milestones (perhaps revenue) being met. 3) All equity - Again with the vesting possibilities in #2 above. Unless you have no other choice, you might want to avoid anything related to equity due to complexity, legal expense, and other reasons. A good option might be to see if you can find a good but inexperienced UX designer who needs to build a portfolio, and would see this as an opportunity to get a case study and build credibility, in exchange for a reduced compensation rate. Lastly, consider hiring a UX designer on a site like Odesk. Many offer services at low hourly rates, and some of them are probably really good.SC
-
We are trying to reach students across US/Int'l universities. Any thoughts on how to best reach them to test a product idea outside of email spamming?
The best thing to do is to do physical, on-the-ground outreach. Part of the success of Tinder as well as many other apps before it were that they threw great parties and events on or near college campuses. The promise of free booze, free food, or really free anything will draw a crowd. Start in your own backyard and then recruit "college ambassadors" and pay them a small flat fee to host the parties and provide them a small incentive structure to hit a certain number of registered attendees. Happy to talk through this with you as I've had some success with college and high school outreach initiatives in the past.TW
-
Is having "HOME" button in navigation menu necessary if I have a clickable logo? What makes most sense from UX POV?
We have been collecting usage data on the home button from about 750 websites we manage across North America in an effort to try to determine if it is necessary or not. While each website is different, and much of the data is statistically insignificant, we have started to operate with a few assumptions. 1.) Most users, particularly younger users, recognize the logo as a way to get to the home page. 2.) Websites without home buttons seem to get a comparable amount of traffic to the home page as those that do not. We don't see a significant difference between having a home button or not. 3.) Websites without a home button often will see an increase in direct traffic from returning users during a session indicating that users who do not know the logo is a route to the home page will instead clear the address bar back to the root domain to get back home. Based on our research, we have decided to omit the home button in most instances. Although when it is present, it is often used, most users seem to understand how to get to the home page regardless of the inclusion of a home button. With the complexity of modern websites, we are usually pressed for space in the header and can better use the real estate that would be dedicated to the home button for other UI elements. That said, if the audience for our website skews older, we will still include the home button. Our research has indicated older users are less familiar with the concept of the logo being a home button.RS
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.