And has “cancel …” like you’d expect on a cancel button. If you stop reading or are skimming (we all do it) you think it’s the cancel button. This is very likely a deliberate choice.
But there’s nothing to cancel here, so in this context there’s no basis for assumption that there would be a cancel button - cancel what? A subscription you don’t yet have? It’s not a logical conclusion.
Sure, we all skim sometimes, but this isn’t a 40 page terms of use document. There are less than 100 words in this entire screenshot. It takes less than 30 seconds to read everything on this page and make an informed decision.
You’re being extremely pedantic. The buttons are affirmative or refusal. That’s what people associate and think. You see “cancel” which is a extremely common refusal button and think it’s a refusal button. People aren’t doing an analysis that “I technically haven’t signed up, so technically there’s nothing to cancel, in the strict definition of cancel a service, so technically cancel doesn’t fit, so the decision tree must therefore be…”. No, you go into affirm or deny.
Ever wonder why at a bank machine you get your card back first and then the cash? Because they found the other way around people take the cash (what they are focused on) and don’t wait for the card. UI design is a real thing precisely to avoid confusion. They are very much taking advantage of it.
Yes, they are: the link on the left clearly states “Continue without Amazon Prime”, the button on the right clearly states “Continue with Amazon Prime”. I don’t share your view that “Cancel anytime” underneath that button is confusing.
The user shares some responsibility in reading what they are clicking on - this is also why “I didn’t read it” isn’t a valid legal defense against a contract or terms you agreed to.
Yes, they are: the link on the left clearly states “
I said it already:
Common UI has “yes” and “no” (or whatever terms) next to each other, often in different colors. This is mimicing it so you think it’s two separate buttons when it’s one button for “yes”.
Not on opposite sides of the screen. Next to each other.
And the whole right side has a big blue box around it. As in all your attention needs to be on the right side, that’s where the decision tree is.
And then like I said, it has the affirmative, and right where you’d expect it the refusal button. But it’s not a refusal button, it’s part of the affirmative button.
I don’t share your view that “Cancel anytime” underneath that button is confusing.
Oh you just did it! “Cancel anytime” is not underneath the button, it is part of the affirmative button. Part of.
Congrats you just got confused. You went on autopilot and got it mixed up. You know, based on what you’d expect based on common UI. You just did what you are lambasting others for.
Oh you just did it! “Cancel anytime” is not underneath the button, it is part of the affirmative button. Part of.
…but it’s not part of the button. The yellow button that says “Continue with Amazon Prime” is fully contained within the yellow button that one would click to proceed.
I’m not sure how much clearer the decline option being on the left, and the proceed option on the right, highlighted in yellow, could be.
And again, the “Cancel anytime” subtext isn’t even clickable, so what deceptive action has Amazon engineered here? For someone to click on a non-clickable target?
There’s no arguing that this is stupid design, but that doesn’t make it asshole design. Hanlon’s razor and all that.
Take another look! Both the yellow button and “cancel …” are part of the same bigger grey box.
This is OP’s complaint. It looks like two boxes/buttons, but it’s one bigger button containing both. You click “cancel…”, and you’ve really just clicked the bigger box that subscribes.
…being within the same container does not make them both the same clickable target. Do you know from personal experience that clicking “Cancel anytime” is clickable? Because as I said, over two hours ago,
It’s not possible to know from this screenshot alone if “Cancel Anytime” is a clickable target or if it’s just text, but when taking a quick glance at least to my eyes the options seem pretty clearly delineated. Amazon sucks and they are plenty predatory, I’m just saying this is a pretty mild example of hostile UI if at all.
Second, if it’s not clickable then OPs complaint makes no sense. The entire context of his post and text indicates that it’s clickable. This is OPs entire complaint.
But at this point I think you’re scrambling for making the exact, exact same mistake as OP. You played yourself. Enjoy the last word attempt to get yourself out of it.
I’ve personally fallen for this, it works and it’s intentional. Anything that tricks a user into clicking on something they didn’t mean to is a dark pattern and asshole design.
I’ve been pretty clear that Amazon is predatory and well-known to be shitty. I’ve been clear using my own example of how difficult it is to cancel Amazon Prime as a great example of hostile UI design.
It’s possible to have an intelligent conversation about how the specific example used in this post isn’t a very good representation of hostile design, especially compared to the other egregious things Amazon has done and continues to do.
You don’t need to resort to being rude, it’s okay to say you don’t agree.
But there’s nothing to cancel here, so in this context there’s no basis for assumption that there would be a cancel button - cancel what? A subscription you don’t yet have? It’s not a logical conclusion.
Sure, we all skim sometimes, but this isn’t a 40 page terms of use document. There are less than 100 words in this entire screenshot. It takes less than 30 seconds to read everything on this page and make an informed decision.
You’re being extremely pedantic. The buttons are affirmative or refusal. That’s what people associate and think. You see “cancel” which is a extremely common refusal button and think it’s a refusal button. People aren’t doing an analysis that “I technically haven’t signed up, so technically there’s nothing to cancel, in the strict definition of cancel a service, so technically cancel doesn’t fit, so the decision tree must therefore be…”. No, you go into affirm or deny.
Ever wonder why at a bank machine you get your card back first and then the cash? Because they found the other way around people take the cash (what they are focused on) and don’t wait for the card. UI design is a real thing precisely to avoid confusion. They are very much taking advantage of it.
Yes, they are: the link on the left clearly states “Continue without Amazon Prime”, the button on the right clearly states “Continue with Amazon Prime”. I don’t share your view that “Cancel anytime” underneath that button is confusing.
The user shares some responsibility in reading what they are clicking on - this is also why “I didn’t read it” isn’t a valid legal defense against a contract or terms you agreed to.
I said it already:
Common UI has “yes” and “no” (or whatever terms) next to each other, often in different colors. This is mimicing it so you think it’s two separate buttons when it’s one button for “yes”.
Not on opposite sides of the screen. Next to each other.
And the whole right side has a big blue box around it. As in all your attention needs to be on the right side, that’s where the decision tree is.
And then like I said, it has the affirmative, and right where you’d expect it the refusal button. But it’s not a refusal button, it’s part of the affirmative button.
Oh you just did it! “Cancel anytime” is not underneath the button, it is part of the affirmative button. Part of.
Congrats you just got confused. You went on autopilot and got it mixed up. You know, based on what you’d expect based on common UI. You just did what you are lambasting others for.
…but it’s not part of the button. The yellow button that says “Continue with Amazon Prime” is fully contained within the yellow button that one would click to proceed.
I’m not sure how much clearer the decline option being on the left, and the proceed option on the right, highlighted in yellow, could be.
And again, the “Cancel anytime” subtext isn’t even clickable, so what deceptive action has Amazon engineered here? For someone to click on a non-clickable target?
There’s no arguing that this is stupid design, but that doesn’t make it asshole design. Hanlon’s razor and all that.
Take another look! Both the yellow button and “cancel …” are part of the same bigger grey box.
This is OP’s complaint. It looks like two boxes/buttons, but it’s one bigger button containing both. You click “cancel…”, and you’ve really just clicked the bigger box that subscribes.
Congrats, you did exactly, exactly, what OP did.
…being within the same container does not make them both the same clickable target. Do you know from personal experience that clicking “Cancel anytime” is clickable? Because as I said, over two hours ago,
First I’m not tracking down your other comments.
Second, if it’s not clickable then OPs complaint makes no sense. The entire context of his post and text indicates that it’s clickable. This is OPs entire complaint.
But at this point I think you’re scrambling for making the exact, exact same mistake as OP. You played yourself. Enjoy the last
wordattempt to get yourself out of it.There “cancel any time” is definitely clickable. It signs you up to Amazon prime with one click.
I’ve personally fallen for this, it works and it’s intentional. Anything that tricks a user into clicking on something they didn’t mean to is a dark pattern and asshole design.
Cancel the process of placing the order.
Fuck off, Andy
We’re having a conversation, there’s really no need to be hostile. You’re allowed to have your own view, as am I.
It was a joke that you’re Andy Jassy, the CEO of Amazon, given your constant defense of the company’s predatory practices.
I’ve been pretty clear that Amazon is predatory and well-known to be shitty. I’ve been clear using my own example of how difficult it is to cancel Amazon Prime as a great example of hostile UI design.
It’s possible to have an intelligent conversation about how the specific example used in this post isn’t a very good representation of hostile design, especially compared to the other egregious things Amazon has done and continues to do.
You don’t need to resort to being rude, it’s okay to say you don’t agree.
Sorry about your reading comprehension