Toasts are bad UX (maxschmitt.me)

Article summary

The article argues that toasts are bad UX because they often appear far away from the user's attention and can be jarring. The author provides examples from YouTube and Gmail, where toasts are used to confirm actions, but can be unnecessary or even confusing. The author suggests alternative design solutions, such as using loading indicators or animating elements to provide feedback. The goal is to provide more intuitive and user-friendly feedback mechanisms.

Main themes

• UX design
• Toasts and notifications
• Feedback mechanisms
• User attention and focus
• Accessibility

What commenters say

• Toasts are overused and can be frustrating, especially for users with limited visual fields or those who prefer feedback close to the point of interaction.
• Toasts can be useful in certain situations, such as when there is no direct relation to a visible UI element or for notifications and heavily asynchronous processes.
• The use of toasts is often a trade-off between development time and usability, with some arguing that centralized messaging and less code can be beneficial.
• Some commenters disagree that toasts are inherently bad UX, suggesting that they can be effective in professional applications where users are familiar with the interface and can quickly process the information.
• Toasts can be problematic for accessibility, particularly when they are timed and auto-hide, making it difficult for users to read or interact with them.
• Alternative design solutions, such as loading indicators, optimistic UI, and debouncing, can provide more intuitive and user-friendly feedback mechanisms.
• The decision to use toasts or alternative feedback mechanisms depends on the specific context and user needs, and there is no one-size-fits-all solution.
• Some commenters argue that the article misses an important angle on toasts as a UX concept, and that they can be a useful tool when used judiciously.