21 Feb 2005 | Serge K. Keller said...

Well, I can't vouch for others, but for me having a peek at the preferences is a way to learn "what will this software do with my data? Will it alter it in a way I won't like?" (Think automatic corrections or adding comments to your source, e.g.)

21 Feb 2005 | Steven Garrity said...

I've taken a different approach lately. I prefer to have my system and application set up as close to "default" as possible. This simplifies setup and makes switching computers or upgrading easier.

Since I'm using a lot more open source software now, rather than change a setting, I'm looking into why that change isn't default - and getting changed if it makes sense.

I see this happening a lot in the open source software world where software projects like a linux distribution, for example, are trying to get "closer to upstream" - meaning they are trying to get more issues fixed and default configurations improved in the software they include (like Gnome, the kernel, Firefox, OpenOffice.org, etc.) rather than fixing the issues "locally" in their distribution.

Up with The Beauty of the Default!

21 Feb 2005 | Jason Lotito said...

Simple: You don't know what the software will do until you use it, but you can find a lot out by looking in the preferences. The preferences gives you a lot of clues about what is and what isn't possible. For example, on installing Norton AV, I go into preferences, and turn off all the features that mention notifying me. I don't want to be notified, I just want stuff to happen. By doing that, I know exactly when it's supposed to notify, and I also have the ability to set up other things, like NAV just doing the updates by itself without me having to interfere.

As far as making personalization options before knowing why: Why not make these decisions? I know what I like and what I don't like, and if the software is going to do certain things I don't like, I want to stop it right there. You could argue that software shouldn't interupt your work-flow, but I don't know that. I don't know that upon installing the software. The best place to look for that is in preferences. The preferences gives you a quick overview of most of the things you can do with the software. It provides you with the different options you have to customize, and that's important. If I go through your software, and find something I don't like, knowing that I can probably change it is important.

I can't trust the developer to make the proper choices for me. More often than not, I have to customize something. I have to deselect some option, or turn some feature on or off. Why should I have to suffer through your software's problems before personalizing it.

I can understand that maybe I should taste the soup before adding salt and pepper to it, but when I have eaten so much soup, I know what I like and don't like. Chances are pretty good that i will taste the soup, and decide it needs salt and pepper anyways.

21 Feb 2005 | Jamie said...

I don't really know anyone who goes straight to the prefs before using the app. However, I know that with every new Photoshop install/upgrade I go straight to the prefs just because I know that I like to view my docs by pixel measurement rather than inches or centimeters, etc. If the app is familiar enough for me, I have no problem getting into the prefs right away.

21 Feb 2005 | Brad said...

I usually only open up the preferences pane if the program does something that annoys me and I want to change it, like when Microsoft Office applications automatically underline misspelled words as I type. Otherwise I usually just live with the program defaults for a month or two, and then I might open up the preferences pane to see if there are any options that might make things easier.

21 Feb 2005 | Brad said...

Oh, and one more thing: one reason I don't spend a lot of time customizing the applications that I use is because you have to do all that customizing all over again whenever you upgrade (unless the software is smart enough to apply your old prefs to the new version, which is sadly not as much the norm as you would expect) or whenever you get a new computer.

21 Feb 2005 | David said...

Desktop softwate, particularly on the PC, give you more features than you need. I go to the Pref pane first because I want to turn off as much of the useless stuff as possible.

21 Feb 2005 | Jonathan LaCour said...

I generally give applications a whirl before I open the preferences, and then I try to keep the changes to a minimum.

As a software developer, the funny thing to me about preferences is how much middle management wants me to _add_ them. I designed the interface for the flagship web application for the healthcare division of my company, and I designed it from the beginning without a preferences page. No settings, no personalization. Just sane defaults. But every time a conflict arises about some feature to add, managers always say the same thing: "just make it a preference." Why is that?

I think one of the most important principles of designing user interfaces is to avoid preferences like the plague. For 99% of users, the defaults can and should work -- especially on the web.

So, when I first launch a new piece of software, I always try to work with the defaults. Good software has good defaults!

21 Feb 2005 | Jeremy Kemper said...

The preferences pane typically communicates scope better than the "blank slate" of a newly-launched app.

Think of it as a dense, 20000' view of what's offered rather than overeager personalization.

21 Feb 2005 | Nick said...

I'm one of those 'jump into the prefs dialog' types for sure, and I agree with some posters above: it's because

1) I can get a bit of a sense of the software by what I can turn on or off (if I can turn X off, the software can do X) and about the program generally by how configurable it is ('not many options' tends to correlate well with 'I end up not liking it')

2) there are some types of things I KNOW I want on or off and I want to make sure the defaults are sane for me :)

n

21 Feb 2005 | William Murray said...

These "preferences first" people are probably the same people who put salt and pepper (or other condiments) on their food before tasting it. I never understood that practice. Some people even advise against it during meal interviews!

Never automatically add salt or pepper to your food before tasting it. You wouldn't want the interviewer to think that you rush to judgment without knowing the facts. If your food needs salt, by all means add itbut find out by tasting it first. (CollegeJournal, from the Wall Street Journal)

That's sound advice whether you're talking about food or software.

21 Feb 2005 | Johan Allard said...

I don't salt and pepper before I taste my food because I don't know how it's tasting. I do however go into the preferences first because I know that I'm someone living in the non-American world and seing things in inches or in the non-iso date format mm/dd/yy is not something I want to get used to. I change the things I know what it is to settings that makes sence to me (i.e. centimeters and yyyy-mm-dd) and I leave application related things until I've given the application a whirl.

21 Feb 2005 | JD said...

Now that you point this out, I will agree that I do it too often myself. And I do it because:

1. It gives me idea about how good program is. I generally like to see what are the default values. This tells me whether developer did a good job selecting the default values. [If you have read Joel, he suggests that selecting good default values is Developer's job.]

2. Number of times, it has helped me discover a feature faster than I would otherwise have.

3. To enforce 'I am a geek' belief! :)

JD

21 Feb 2005 | Dan said...

I designed the interface for the flagship web application for the healthcare division of my company, and I designed it from the beginning without a preferences page. No settings, no personalization. Just sane defaults. But every time a conflict arises about some feature to add, managers always say the same thing: "just make it a preference." Why is that?

I feel your pain, my friend... Currently, I'm working on a proposal at work to overhaul our database's web interface, and you better believe one of the first things I'd like to implement is a preferences page. It all stems from two realizations:

1) People don't all think alike. There are going to be defaults that certain people will like just fine, but others will wish worked differently. And if it makes users more efficient and effective using the interface to do their jobs, I'm all for user customization.

2) People like making their own choices. It gives them a feeling of empowerment, however insignificant in the grand scheme of the software. You want users to like what they're using.

But to answer the question of the post, I generally don't visit preferences until the application gives me a reason to (e.g. "Holy crap, that's annoying...").

21 Feb 2005 | Derek Nelson said...

Answer: People are different.

Just like the photoshop mention above, there are people who work in pixels and people who don't.

I agree with the making software simple and not adding unnecessary features, but it seems as though the focus here seems to be killing preferences altogether. I'm just not sure I get why.

For example, Basecamp is a superb piece of software. But, there have been quite a few times that I went, "I wish I could do...". It's not that the software isn't great, but there are some things I would just "prefer" over others.

I also understand that development time is increased and costs might go up as features are added, but does the average customer say, "I wish my software would do this, but I know it would take another week of work for the developer, so I'll live without it"?

I just don't believe that things are as black and white as this. Shouldn't the focus be on creating the right preferences and setting up the best default set.

Maybe I just am missing the point. What about this question. How would Basecamp be worse if it were set up exactly the same as it is now, except you had a preference page with 5-10 added preferences that allowed for it to be customized to suit different needs of users?

21 Feb 2005 | Tomas said...

Because most web apps aren't made by you guys.

21 Feb 2005 | Dave Marks said...

Like others have said, for me its normally that I have already used the software before... like FireFox for example, the first thing i do is download a couple of important extentions - for me this is double click to close tab, and drag a link into blank space to open in a new tab. If I'm going to be working, then the web developer extention is a must.
I also have to change the default download to prompt for a download location.

I know all these things are going to bug me, without them its like having my my shoe laces tired together - you go and do something instictly only to find you fall over....

With new software I'm unfamiliar with, again like others have said... its a good way to get to know about the app.

With some software you can second guess what options there will be, and you know what you're gonna wanna change from previous experience... the anti-virus example is a good one...

21 Feb 2005 | Dave Marks said...

Sorry to double post, but something else thats just come to mind...

When you install a lot of desktop software, you get prompted for choices as it makes its way through the install process... with the web, beyond entering username/password/name/address etc, you don't normally get that step by step setup before you start using the thing...

Prehaps that why...

21 Feb 2005 | John said...

With software genres that I'm generally familiar I usually go to the preferences first. I have a general sense of what I need and what I don't want the software to do. Toolbars are always quick to change, as most of the defaults have every button available displayed. Plus, I'd rather have a basic idea of what's user-changeable, and put my input into it before the software goes ahead with default internet connection use and file management processes.

21 Feb 2005 | Chris Vincent said...

Actually, I think that if the application in question is well-designed, the preferences should be easy to figure out before you've used it. Quicksilver, for example (a popular launcher for Mac OS X). When I go to the preferences, before I've even used the app, I know what each option will do, and generally where I want them set.

Even if this is not true, I at least like to know what I *can* change if I feel the need to customize later.

One more thing... preferences sometimes give you a better idea of the app's capabilities, sometimes some things that aren't obvious at the surface.

21 Feb 2005 | Aaron said...

Answer: People are different... I agree with the making software simple and not adding unnecessary features, but it seems as though the focus here seems to be killing preferences altogether. I'm just not sure I get why.

Derek, did you read the post? This isn't about preferences in general at all. It's a question about why people often gravitate to preferences right off the bat before they've even had a chance to experience the default state of the software.

21 Feb 2005 | Derek Nelson said...

Aaron - Yes, I read the post and I did make an assumption of the reason behind the question of going to the preferences first. I probably shouldn't assume.

My assumption came from the fact that a lot of talk here always seems to go the route of less preferences. I am simply questioning if some software would be any worse off if there were more (albeit sensible) preferences.

Plus, the title of the post leans towards my assumption.

21 Feb 2005 | kingbenny said...

This isn't about preferences in general at all.

Well, its not like they're entirely unrelated...

21 Feb 2005 | Mike D. said...

Jason said it best I think so far. You just cannot trust the developer to know exactly who you are and what you'll like.

On top of that, most applications are derivatives of other applications. Rarely do you install an application that doesn't share some sort of similarities as others you've already used. Case in point, Fire. I just installed Fire to take over for iChat, MSN IM, and Yahoo IM. Where did I go first? The preference of course. I *know* I want my messages typed in Lucida Grande 11. I *know* that one theme will look better to me than the others. I *know* I don't want people not on my buddy list to be able to see my status. The truth is that most things in preference dialog boxes are not really foreign to me at all. If I haven't already used them in other apps, I can generally predict what they will do anyway.

Now, there is the semi-rare case of a preference that I have absolutely no idea about. Something like the old "Use Video LUT Animation" checkbox in previous versions of Photoshop. For these foreign elements, I'll just leave it alone and tweak it if I need to later.

I just think with how similar the nomenclature in most preference boxes these days is, it's really not tough to predict which things you can change right away. And of course, you can always go back in a week later to adjust things if need be.

22 Feb 2005 | Mat said...

I addition to getting a kind of speed-date with the application, I check the preferences first, just because I know that when I start using the application, certain things will irritate me.

Often I will then remember having seen a setting for it, and nip in to change it before I get too annoyed. It could just be my helpdesk background coming out though - then you really need to know about preferences.

22 Feb 2005 | Martin said...

How many times have you installed an app, only to discover that it has set itself to load at startup, changed file associations to benefit itself, installed additional, unnecessary loaders, set itself for automatic updates or agreed to send information about your use of the app to the original manufacturer (without your premission)?

I know one app that does all of these things: Real Player.

I treat every app the same way as I would treat Real Player; ie. designed and built by people who want to make as much money as they can at your expense.

22 Feb 2005 | Lite said...

It depends. When I do an upgrade to Photoshop or any Macromedia product, I usually check the preferences to make sure my palette settings are still intact.

Or I may go disable any nag screens, registration, tool tip type stuff.

With later versions of Adobe Acrobat, they tend to put al kinds of crapola in your registry, so i go adjust preferences, AND check my startup dir.

very frustrating.

Real is another bad one with "hijacking your desktop" definitely have to check preferences there (auto-updaters, etc..)

22 Feb 2005 | pb said...

I'm with Steven Garrity: I try to leave everything as close to default as possible. That's why default setting are so excruciatingly important.

22 Feb 2005 | One of several Steves said...

How many times have you installed an app, only to discover that it has set itself to load at startup, changed file associations to benefit itself, installed additional, unnecessary loaders, set itself for automatic updates or agreed to send information about your use of the app to the original manufacturer (without your premission)?

Bingo. Too many apps try to dominate your computer, making themselves the default for everything, behave in the way the developers want it to behave instead of the way you want it to behave, etc. That's the largest reason I head quickly to the preferences on most new apps I install. Especially if they're as obnoxious as Real, where some things get ignored even if you specify them by going to "custom" when installing.

Which reminds me, a similar question would be why do people go to "custom" install instead of "express"? Why not just install the app exactly the way the software company wants you to? To me, the motivation to always select "custom" is the same as going to preferences right away. I want to see what the program is going to do to my machine, and I want to change the things it's going to do that I know from the start I'm not going to like.

22 Feb 2005 | Dan said...

To me, the motivation to always select "custom" is the same as going to preferences right away. I want to see what the program is going to do to my machine, and I want to change the things it's going to do that I know from the start I'm not going to like.

That's a great point, Steve. There's definitely a similarity between the two. While I generally don't head for the preferences upon launching, I always choose custom install to see what extras I can pare from the installation (e.g. all the Asian fonts from the OS X install disks).

I don't know if anyone made this point already (it's hard to read while skimming), but sometimes, the default settings are just stupid. iTunes is a good example. Does anyone really enjoy the crossfade playback feature? Or looking at eight thousand Music Store arrows in your song library?

23 Feb 2005 | Mike Piontek said...

Jason Lotito summed up my thoughts very well.

I don't go for the preferences immediately, but I do check them out pretty soon after trying an app. It's pretty rare that an app is exactly what I want right from the start... I check the prefs to see what else it's capable of and if there's anything I can change to make it better suit my needs. I want to adjust the app for the way I work, not adjust the way I work for the app.

Regarding the comment on switching computers: I just sync up my entire OS X Library folder. It works beautifully, copying all of my preferences and quite a few other things I like to take with me.

Regarding upgrading: I have to say, I rarely encounter apps that trash all of my preferences when I upgrade. But even if I do have to start over, I don't find it a big deal. I like to look through the preferences again when I upgrade an app anyway... Just to see if there are any new options I might find useful.

Jonathan LaCour said "I think one of the most important principles of designing user interfaces is to avoid preferences like the plague. For 99% of users, the defaults can and should work..."

I don't follow that logic. Yes, I think it's very important to design an interface that will work for the majority of your audience without any customization. Many people won't bother to dig through the preferences to make an application work well for them.

However, if you can add some preferences to make your application work even better for a select portion of your audience, why not? I find a lot of apps that are close to what I need out of the box. Often times a simple preference or two will make them exactly what I need. If that's the case, I'm sold... otherwise I'm going to keep looking for something better.

24 Feb 2005 | Peter Davidson said...

I see this same proclivity in other areas of life. Years ago I worked for a successful architect who designed high end residential remodeling. Often people would approach us and want to completely renovate and modify(tweak the preferences) a fine old house they had just purchased. Before they even moved in. We always insisted that they move in and live there for six months preferably two years(use the product) before beginning the design process of modification. This would give them time to learn how the house lived. How the light moved in different seasons. Where the drafts and views were. Where they needed more space or organization, etc. Renovations after this knowledge was acquired were always far superior than those who choose to renovate immediately to satisfy the instant gratification itch.

I would agree with those who examine the preferences and not necessarily modify them from the defaults just to learn what functions and features can be modified if I need to. I also agree that it's a nice way to discover some of the features of a product.

28 Feb 2005 | Jough said...

The real problem is that the "Custom" installation option doesn't offer *enough* choices. So going to "Options" or "Preferences" immediately is a way of continuing the installation.

For instance, most AV applications default to only scanning *some* files, and not scanning archives. I want my AntiVirus app to scan *all* files including archives, and since the default scan settings aren't customizeable via the installer, as it should be if you select the "Custom" rather than "Default" option, you have to alter its behavior after the fact with the preferences menus.

It's also annoying that few apps allow importing/exporting of menu options - I end up exporting many applications' registry entries and saving .ini files and other .conf files manually so I can paste them back into the program dir once I've re-installed it (on another machine or after a rebuild).

Many (most?) application developers seem to ignore the needs of their users with regards to customization and moving from one computer to another. The "Documents and Settings" folder in NT/2000/XP is a joke. Out of over 100 applications installed, a whopping FOUR put their preferences in there, and out of those only one of them (WS_FTP) doesn't also store parts of the preferences elsewhere (such as in the Program Files dir or in the registry).

I won't even get started on how scattered preferences can become in Mac OS or *nix.