stop blindly listening to journalists and have some taste.

i have a UX maxim with a ton of evidence behind it that no one seems to talk about:

if a product you're releasing has worse ergonomics that what currently exists, it WON'T WORK. evidence:

1. the wii -> was a success itself but couldn't go to a next generation because having static controllers is more ergonomic than the waving around gimmick 2. the touchbar -> looking at the small screen is less ergonomic than muscle memory 3. butterfly keyboard 4. touch keyboards on laptops -> no muscle memory 5. stylus 6. VR (and especially the apple vision which is extremely heavy) 7. every voice agent device ever -> rabbit r1, humane pin, muse device and whatever openai has in mind won't work. voice is very limiting in a ton of situations where it would render the device useless. 8. car touchscreens for everything instead of physical buttons (we haven't gone past this yet) 9. 3d tvs

the list goes on.

the proof that this is a law of UX is that the opposite is also true:

1. agents are better than UIs -> having an agent that knows a ton about me, how i like to work and can connect to UIs that are inconsistent and buggy is fantastic and that's why everyone's using them. 2. automatic transmission (unless you're an enthusiast) 3. phone aspect ratios converging (remember early 2000 where all phones were completely different with zero interchangeability?) 4. mice > trackpad 5. airpods 6. keyless car entry 7. tab autocomplete 8. apple pay 9. rolling luggage

touch on a laptop is the most unergonomic thing someone could come up with. how is it easier to lift your arm from the resting position where the trackpad is to touch the same thing the trackpad could touch?

folding phones are a worse version of the ipad, much worse version of the mac, and much worse version of the regular iphone. people don't want to work on their phones.