[waterhouse]

The title is really a stretch. The "less straightforward UX" presented new information that the original UX did not—viz., where the locations were on a map—and made it easy for people to find the most recent report from a given location. I guess if you have memorized the names of all the trails you're interested in, and know their locations, then technically the original UX can be used in the same way by typing in those names; but if that's not the case, and if your approach is "look at the locations in approximate order of how nearby they are and view the most recent report for each", then the new UX is more straightforward. (Maybe it was less straightforward for the author to implement, but that is not what "straightforward UX" means.)

He says himself: "When surveyed, 76% of users reported that they only skied at trails within 30 minutes of their home. This was a huge breakthrough. It indicates that people place the highest priority on nearby trails". And so the users are happier with an interface that shows location. The idea that this is explained by users wanting their interface to be an unsolved Rubik's cube and users liking to hunt for information rather than having it be presented to them ... I can only hope that he's joking.

Incidentally, he could also have taken the original UX and added some "Sort by: [date | proximity | ...]" tooling, plus a field saying "X miles away", which would probably be more efficient all around.

[finfinfin]

"This was a huge breakthrough" caught me off-guard.

People prefer trails within 30 minutes of their home as opposed to what? Within 72 hours of their home? I am not sure if a user survey was needed to determine this obvious fact.

[autoexec]

Maybe they expected more users were the type to live in warm places and travel to where the snow was rather than live in cold places where snow happens? That's all I can think of anyway. That'd probably make more sense for downhill skiers though...

[plorkyeran]

People who live in SF but are trying to decide if they want to drive up to Tahoe on the weekend aren't going to care about trails within 30 minutes of their home since the closest ones are 3 hours away. The author appears not to live in SF, but I assume they live in a city that similarly doesn't have ski resorts locally but does have them within day trip distance and were simply too focused on their personal usecase.

[randallsquared]

Apparently he assumed that people prefer trails they've selected to "follow" in the app. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯