<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>User on (bit-mage)</title><link>https://rajp152k.github.io/tags/user/</link><description>Recent content in User on (bit-mage)</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 06:55:02 +0530</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://rajp152k.github.io/tags/user/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Engineering for Evolution</title><link>https://rajp152k.github.io/post/planning-for-evolution/</link><pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 06:55:02 +0530</pubDate><guid>https://rajp152k.github.io/post/planning-for-evolution/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;The criteria for engineering a good user experience spans across diverse incentives.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ease of use is the most well known one, but I find it to be subjective. A cognitive device that helps me when in the development cycle is a flavor of iterating with the question of &amp;ldquo;how do I make this more intuitive?&amp;rdquo;. This follows from the realization that even for measurement along qualitative dimensions, we generally find comparing two entities (and ranking them higher/lower) easier than to come up with an absolute measure of that quality and resuming with a global sort. Working on concrete iterations also allows me explicitly think out loud in terms of what worked and what did not and then abstract later on for future wisdom.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>