[dfxm12]

I think good usability benefits everyone

I'm not sure we can say this. There are tradeoffs when you can't make assumptions about your end user. Text that is comfortably large for someone with bad eyesight might not allow enough text for someone with better eyesight. Volumes for someone with poor hearing might be painful for someone with better hearing, etc. A company like Apple will always err towards the demo that isn't likely on a fixed income.

[kulahan]

We've got companies actively removing usability from their products in order to chase fads - check out Youtube Shorts and how they don't have stuff like manual tracking or volume control at all.

Maybe your argument has some merit to it, but based on where we are, I don't think it needs to be worried about too much.

[TeMPOraL]

Companies don't remove usability just to chase fads. They do it to exploit users.

The lack of manual tracking on YouTube shorts, or (much earlier) Instagram reels? That's not a fad, that's a "feature" - it's meant to change the way you interact with and experience the content, forcing you into a paradigm that's optimal for the vendor.

Same with other usability and accessibility features of yore - the ones that disappear first are the ones giving users flexibility and control, because the point is to funnel users into specific, optimized workflows that are most profitable for the vendor.

[kulahan]

The REASON they're chasing the fad is to change how you interact with the content in a way that's positive for them.

[spencerchubb]

What do you mean by manual tracking? And how is there no volume control? Can't you just change the volume on your device?

[lolinder]

> Can't you just change the volume on your device?

And this is the problem with YouTube shorts—they've been designed exclusively for the mobile experience without any consideration for desktop.

On desktop it's always been customary to allow adjusting the volume on each piece of media individually, because multitasking is not uncommon. Some people will want to be able to adjust the volume of YouTube independently from the volume of the video game they're playing at the same time. Or even just turn the volume down while still having full volume alerts from Slack.

[spencerchubb]

I don't see it as a problem to make a mobile-first experience. A volume setting takes up screen real estate and is really not needed on mobile.

Perhaps it will be added to desktop Shorts as the product matures.

[lolinder]

> A volume setting takes up screen real estate and is really not needed on mobile.

This is a solved problem: don't show the volume control on mobile. This is what YouTube already does for every other kind of video.

[spencerchubb]

I agree, and that's what I just said. YouTube Shorts has not existed very long, but it could very well be on the roadmap to add a volume control to the desktop version.

[lxe]

That's the thing. _good_ usability that benefits everyone is not always trivial. Or cheap.

Having huge text everywhere or loud volume is not the same as having a good way to easily change text size or adjust the volume.

[jdietrich]

There's not really such a thing as usability that benefits everyone. Design is defined by tradeoffs; if you think you've found a perfect solution, you probably haven't fully understood the problem.

Many blind people rely on tactile paving bumps to navigate the urban environment. Those bumps are a literal pain in the ass for wheelchair users who have to roll over them. An ATM that is low enough for a wheelchair user to reach might be too low for a tall person with a stiff back. A computer interface that seems absurdly over-simplified to a power user might still be impossibly complex for a novice.

[mcswell]

There's a simple solution to at least the text problem: software control. On most web browsers you can embiggen or ensmallen the font with Ctrl-Plus or Ctrl-Minus. And every app has a way of controlling audio volume, and often the OS and/or hardware that the app runs on can also control the audio. So I don't think that's an issue at all.