The Big Web “Add On” Controversy
February 19, 2007
Filed Under Blog
Why can’t good things stick around? It seems that with the evolutionary approach of the Internet, this often becomes a compulsion for companies. In many cases, this can be a good thing — constantly improving usability and the user experience. But often, the addition of new and enhanced features muddy the usability playing field for the end user.
As an example, I was a loyal user of AOL’s chat function for years. But, like it’s predecessor, ICQ, AOL continued to add new features and functions to the chat engine. Web products tend to all want to do the same thing: mimic browser functions. Over time, these functions got in the way of the original purpose of the product which was allowing quick and easy text-based chatting.
I soon moved to Google Talk, when it was introduced, offering a simple interface and functions. To date, Google has stayed true to the format, not allowing new features and functions to get in the way with the product’s original intent.
There’s an underground rising of people who appreciate the original intent of web-based experiences. Take for instance “Give Me Back My Google.” This site presents current Google search results, in the original, “affiliate free” format. If you do some searching on your own, I’m sure you can find many of these grassroots movements out there.
We all understand that the addition of new features and functions are often driven by expanding the revenue opportunities for a company. However, when these new opportunities get in the way of the original intended use of the tools, the end user experience and future loyalty can be harmed and ultimately, they find other sources to fill the need.