-
@ Geo
2025-01-19 10:20:02
### The Problem with Preset Choices
Switching sections around? Not an option—we’ve already decided for you, buddy. Remove bright colors? Come on, it’s already beautiful. Disable unnecessary features? Don’t be silly, you need everything here. Especially this algorithmic feed with built-in ads.
### Monetization Over User Experience
The operators of digital services will always prioritize their primary goal: monetizing the product as efficiently as possible. They need to not only attract new users but also retain existing ones. And the best tool for this is the interface.
That’s why most product decisions are far removed from ideas like “Let’s make it more convenient for people” or “Let’s give users more freedom.” Instead, we see the result of a recurring process:
- We have a retention and monetization mechanism
- Assign tasks to developers and designers
- Integrate it into the product
- Write a quarterly report.
The outcome? Users end up with Reels tabs smack in the center of Instagram’s bottom navigation bar. Removing or rearranging those tabs? Not an option. And it likely never will be.
### Why Rigid Interfaces Persist
Another reason for rigid and obligatory interfaces is that they’re easier to design. Just imagine how many combinations of colors, elements, and layouts developers would need to account for to make a product both customizable and functional without turning it into a garish mess. But that’s just nuance and excuses.
### The Myth of Perfect Design
Services often justify their choices by claiming their design is “the most designed,” that they know what’s best and will make it work for everyone. They might even present solid arguments for this. But all those arguments fall apart against the reality we see on our screens every day. In my opinion, people should have the ability to turn a product into anything they want—whether it’s loud and kitschy or minimalistic and dull. This option wouldn’t just allow users to express themselves but could also help with digital detoxing.
### The Example of App Labels
Here’s an example: why do app icons on smartphone home screens (not the app drawer) come with labels underneath? Apps on the home screen are easily recognizable by their icons. Why would I need a name tag for an app I intentionally placed there? Sure, for some users or scenarios, this might be helpful. But why is it the default option?
The problem is that these labels are just visual noise—clusters of unnecessary text we already see plenty of. Removing them would make it slightly easier for the brain to process the screen every time you look at it. Now scale that to 3–8 hours of daily smartphone use. Then a month. Then a year.
### The Slow Shift Toward Customization
For a long time, iOS didn’t allow you to hide icon labels. Now, the option exists, but it still requires more effort than a simple toggle. As a result, people are stuck looking at tons of unnecessary, subconscious information every day. And this is just the trivial issue of app labels on a product considered the gold standard of digital design. Imagine the horror of tackling more significant issues.
Yes, Apple has softened its stance in recent years, offering custom icons and lock screens. Celebrate—you can now showcase your individuality! The company understands that customization is the future. We’ve reached a point where weak computing power is no longer an excuse, VR/metaverse adoption is still a way off, and new features are needed. So, this is an excellent opportunity for all of us.
### The Case for More Customization
In a reasonable, ideal world, people should decide which sections of a service they need, where they’re located, and how they look. Companies, meanwhile, recognize that people want the ability to stand out and create something personal—even on a smartphone in their pocket. And as our integration with various devices deepens, this need will only grow. More customization is coming. Yes, it’ll be largely cosmetic, but even that can work to our advantage: removing jarring colors or hiding unnecessary labels can reduce the brain’s pointless load.
### Beyond Aesthetics: Customization as Freedom
The ability to customize services isn’t just about playing amateur designer. It’s about mitigating informational irritants, reducing the addictive nature of interfaces, and weakening dark patterns. Which is likely why many companies no longer prioritize customization.
### Telegram: A Customizable Example
In this context, Telegram is a decent example. I’m not a fan, but I’ve been using it for daily communication with loved ones for a long time—and it’s good for that. It can be vastly different for vastly different users. Despite starting to bend under the weight of its audience and introducing questionable decisions, its foundational design principles still allow for creating both minimalist spaces for peaceful content consumption or communication, as well as vibrant, noisy chats for virtual parties. Telegram can be a messenger, a feed, a file storage system, or whatever else you need—and it can look wildly different while doing so.
### Customization as the Key to Healthy Digital Relationships
Customization should be at the core of the services we use daily. Yes, it can and will be used for marketing purposes. But even minimal customization is better than none because the ability to tailor a system to your needs is an expression of freedom and a cornerstone of healthy relationships with the digital world.
**Stay Nostrous. Geo**