I'm looking for examples of UX/interface design where:
* users started using a feature in a way that wasn't intended (can be for good or for ill)
* the product team responded by removing the feature entirely
Also very interested in interfaces where there is an obvious feature that users would want/need that's not provided, and that feature is obviously not provided because it's against the interests of the company who makes the software.
Can anyone think of examples which fit?
@shauna I have a story that sort of fits, but I also have some sympathy for the product team here:
Dragon NaturallySpeaking speech recognition has a feature called Select-and-Say, where you can edit what you've already dictated by saying things like "select 'I have a story'". It is invaluable because speech recognition does make mistakes that need editing, and using the arrow keys and delete keys can be just as impossible/hard as typing text for disabled users. 1/n
@shauna The trouble is, this feature requires Dragon to be aware of the text in the editing window. And Dragon only properly supports this for Word, Outlook, and the major browsers.
So in old versions of Dragon, it would just guess. Because it knew what you had dictated with your voice, even if it didn't know what you had typed with your hands. So Select-and-Say worked in all applications as long as you didn't touch the keyboard. 2/n
Shauna GM
Yingtai