Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Netflix's New Web Interface Gets Thumbs Down From Users

Posted by timothy on from the where's-action-hero-donald-a-norman? dept.

Verdatum writes "Entertainment Weekly is one of many sites reporting the strong negative reaction from users of the new Netflix web interface. The new interface presents larger title images at the cost of visible ratings and the 'Sortable List' view. To see a suggested rating or view details, one must now first hover over each individual title. Netflix announced the new interface on Wednesday, in an official blog post. So far, the post has received thousands of negative comments, but only a few dozen comments by users believing the change is an improvement."

17 of 267 comments (clear)

  1. No surprise there by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The old interface was fine, the new one is slow and is not sortable.

    1. Re:No surprise there by immaterial · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The scroll really is atrocious. You used to click the "next" arrow and it would quickly scroll in and entire new row. Now you have to hover the mouse over one end or the other (no visual feedback on that, even) and it will begin to slowly scroll them by, at a rate of less than one movie per second. To scroll through thirty movies used to take maybe five seconds, and now it takes upwards of thirty. For those who say, "Users always hate change!", I am a person who welcomes a new and improved interface, but this is out-and-out, unequivocally less useful and more time consuming to use than the old interface. How anyone thought it was a good idea is beyond me.

  2. Breaking story by Trillan · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Users hate change.

    1. Re:Breaking story by HBI · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The new interface of /. is still less usable than the previous iteration(s). It was one reason why a significant blogging community fractured and departed a few years back, along with reliability issues and the easily abused moderation system.

      This entire thread seems to be just an excuse for developers to pay no attention to usability issues. As usual.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    2. Re:Breaking story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Users hate having useful features removed from the front page. Before this change, the first thing on the front page when I logged in was "recently watched," which allowed me to instantly jump to the next episode of whatever series I was watching before. Completely gone now, I need to search to figure out where I was at. Freaking stupid.

    3. Re:Breaking story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Users also hate removed features...

      Titles of movies removed (hopefully it is big enough on the picture). Seen it already, removed. Rated already, buried. Extra clicks to see reviews. Extra clicks to see star level. Slow scrolling compared to before. The ability to sort is buried somewhere or just gone.

      This is a step backwards in usability. It *looks* cooler. It has the possibility to be better. But needs the above features back in. Classic case of form over function.

      Oh and dont accidentally click on a movie. Starts it instantly. If you want to watch it or not (I have already done this at least 4 times).

      More like someone bought an iPhone and thought it was the best interface ever. Missing the fact they had a very good organically grown one. The old one took only a couple of mins fiddling around to see how it worked. This new one, not so much...

    4. Re:Breaking story by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That click-image-once-to-play behavior is the single biggest and stupidest mistake of this UI design. I'm really not the kind of person who calls for people to be fired, but I sincerely hope that the person who suggested it and the person who approved it both do some soul-searching and consider going into real estate or social work or construction, or some other career choice that they have a better aptitude for.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
  3. Netflix API by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What Netflix really ought to do is publish an API and let people make their own interfaces.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Netflix API by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This a million times this.
      And please give a FREE and open method of playing it. I want to make my own view and have it work on any device.

    2. Re:Netflix API by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Third Party Applications

              [...]
              May not play Netflix movies inline, but may launch our stand-alone player when a member hits the Play button. Not available for Mobile applications.

      So you can make interfaces but they ultimately suck. Also I think most would agree that being able to play on Linux is a priority. I don't think it's paranoid to assume that Microsoft gave away a board seat partly to ensure that would not happen.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  4. Leaving well enough alone... not! by woboyle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A lot of web sites that have tuned their main (and other) pages over time to be usable and accessible, often seem to think that a major change is "improvement". Sometimes it is, but often it isn't simply because they don't spend enough energy on validating functionality and usability with their users. Having a "try new interface" or "use old interface" options would help so that people can try out the new look, yet go back to the old one if the new interface doesn't work for them. Then, requesting active feedback from users will help them to make sure that all is working as they wish before deprecating the old interfaces. Like customers, the users are always right. New eye candy may not be what you need to be successful.

    --
    Sometimes, real fast is almost as good as real-time.
  5. Another example of form over function by mfearby · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This disease of making something a designer's wet dream at the expense of actual usability is becoming more and more widespread. It needs to stop! The same can be said of Unity or GNOME 3. Sure, taken as a stand-alone GUI art installation, it might turn some heads and get a few people excited, but if you have to use the darn thing for more than an hour, its inadequacy outshines the shiny!

    The ultimate arbiter of whether a design or a change is a good thing should be whether or not you've increased the number of clicks/hovers/steps that a user has to go through to achieve the same task. If so, then bin it and start again. Sorry, but fancy interfaces won't win anybody over if you're pissed off simply having to use it. Just like a trophy bride, she might look nice, but eventually the nagging turns you right off.

    1. Re:Another example of form over function by vitaflo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Having been a web designer for the better part of 15 years I think you should be careful when you lump designers into taking the blame for this. In doing so you give them way to much power.

      Any real designer would consider the new Netflix site an abomination. It sucks for the reasons everyone knows it sucks. But if you've ever actually done design work you would know that these sorts of sites rarely are the brain child of a typical web designer. These horrible UI decisions are usually the result of many layers of bureaucracy inside a company, with middle managers inevitably deciding on their own pet ideas and influencing design ("Ohh bigger images, bigger!", "Hover scrolls! Those would be cool and fun!").

      In fact, the hardest part of being a designer isn't design. That's not particularly difficult. No, it's the fact that design to most people is subjective and thus everyone feels the need to want to add their own bits and pieces into a design, even when they make no sense and are horrible ideas. This is why so much of design education is learning about critique, because inevitably, someone will want to add amazingly bad ideas to an otherwise decent UI and you need to learn how to argue for (or against) your ideas.

      What this design says to me is that Netflix may have just gotten too big for its own good. Marketers and managers seem to be having way too much say on the user experience of the website. This happens to all big companies eventually, it's just unfortunate that Netflix has finally crossed that line.

  6. A very bad trend in online interfaces. by webdog314 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It seems that web interfaces are simply doing away with the "click". It's as if designers were told "fewer clicks is better", and so they naturally thought that NO clicks must be best. I freaking HATE rollover interfaces. If I want to see the details, then I can avail myself to lightly depress my mouse button a millimeter or two. Otherwise, keep it the hell out of my face.

    This new Netflix interface sucks.

  7. Re:I hate Netflix. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Streaming hundreds of megabits of video across a public network, when a simple trip to the corner video store to rent a DVD results in a better picture and 5.1 surround sound just makes no sense.

    And it never will if short-sighted people like you have anything to say about it.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  8. Re:I hate Netflix. by AmigaHeretic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The bandwidth usage has exploded on our network, and the two biggest culprits are Netflix and MLB.TV. We are considering requiring users who are detected using these services to have to subscribe to the highest service tier, or have those services blocked.

    So what service are these people paying you for? Are they paying for an advertised known limited bandwidth service and then going over their limit? If that is the case then why not cut them off when they reach their cap??

    Or are you just offering them "Internet" service. Then when they actually "USE" it, your panties get in a bunch?

  9. Generic developer response to upset users by artor3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I worked for weeks on this update! It is clearly superior to version n-1, and even though it lacks some of n-1's features, nobody was using them anyway. What, you say you were using those? Every day? Well, then, you're using my program wrong! Besides, the new features in version n more than make up for any inconvenience. You say that the new features don't work in your os/browser? Impossible, I tested this update for almost a whole day!