Flag

We stand with Ukraine and our team members from Ukraine. Here are ways you can help

Get exclusive access to thought-provoking articles, bonus podcast content, and cutting-edge whitepapers. Become a member of the UX Magazine community today!

Home ›› Accessibility ›› Stop Helping Me, Google Calendar Autosuggest #wtfUX

Stop Helping Me, Google Calendar Autosuggest #wtfUX

by John Boykin
2 min read
Share this post on
Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Save

Had Google thought more about probability than about throwing in their existing technology just because they could, they would have left autosuggest out.

My client’s office in San Francisco has a corner called the UX area. Here’s what happens as I type “UX area” in Google Calendar as the location for a meeting:

What are the chances any of those are what I mean?

Autosuggest, which is such a great help for searching the web, is a worse-than-useless distraction in a calendar app. Why? Probability.

Searching the web is likely to be an expansive activity: You often don’t know exactly what you’re looking for, so you will probably welcome a discovery from the far-flung universe of possibilities.

But creating an entry in your calendar is the opposite. It’s a narrow, personal, intimate activity. You know precisely what you mean and want. A calendar entry reflects the comparatively small circle of people and topics and places you personally deal with.

So your act of creating an entry in your calendar is highly unlikely to be helped by intrusions from the far-flung universe of possibilities. And even when Google Calendar autosuggests something theoretically useful like people from my contacts list or history, that only slows me down. I can finish typing “Mike Starbucks” much faster – even with my thumbs – than I can redirect my attention to an autosuggestion list that changes with every character I type, scan and scroll through the many misses to find a hit (if any), and then tap/click that listing.

And don’t even get me started about the times Google Calendar defaults to a prepopulated date in the past…

Had Google thought more about probability than about throwing in their existing technology just because they could, they would have left autosuggest out, making Google Calendar actually more efficient to use.

Keep these coming. Send them to us via Twitter or Facebook using the hastag #wtfUX or email them to: [email protected] with “#wtfUX” in the subject line. Include as much context as you can, so we get a full understanding of what the f%*k went wrong.

Image of man with phone courtesy of Shutterstock.

post authorJohn Boykin

John Boykin
John Boykin answers to user experience designer, information architect, interaction designer, information designer, and UX researcher. He’s been doing all of the above for over 10 years. Clients include Walmart, Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s, Blue Shield, Bank of America, Visa, Symantec, NBC, HP, Janus, Prosper, and Mitsubishi Motors. His site, wayfind.com, will tell you more than you want to know.

Tweet
Share
Post
Share
Email
Print

Related Articles

Learn about the most difficult challenge for designers in Agile.

Article by Paivi Salminen
The Part of Agile Designers Fear the Most: Imperfect Work
  • The article argues that designers aren’t afraid of shipping imperfect work; they’re afraid of imperfect work remaining imperfect because teams tend not to come back to improve what they’ve already shipped.
Share:The Part of Agile Designers Fear the Most: Imperfect Work
4 min read

Find out why slapping gamification on your product without first selecting a genre is the silent killer of your engagement strategy.

Article by Montgomery Singman
Gamification 2.0. Beyond Points and Badges: Designing for Players, Not Metrics. Chapter 3: The Framework
  • The article argues that “adding gamification” without selecting a genre is akin to “adding music” without referencing jazz or heavy metal: a category error that most product teams never realize they’re making.
  • It contends that different game genres are not just aesthetic choices; they are fundamentally different motivational architectures, and mapping your product to the wrong one is why most gamification fails.
Share:Gamification 2.0. Beyond Points and Badges: Designing for Players, Not Metrics. Chapter 3: The Framework
19 min read

Learn why shipping AI features is the easy part and what it takes to get people to trust them.

Article by Anina Botha
Making the Invisible, Visible: 6 Months of Diving Deeper into AI
  • The piece states that building AI features is easy. But building them on purpose, turning invisible human behaviors like trust and bias into deliberate design choices, is where the work lives.
Share:Making the Invisible, Visible: 6 Months of Diving Deeper into AI
4 min read

Join the UX Magazine community!

Stay informed with exclusive content on the intersection of UX, AI agents, and agentic automation—essential reading for future-focused professionals.

Hello!

You're officially a member of the UX Magazine Community.
We're excited to have you with us!

Thank you!

To begin viewing member content, please verify your email.

Get Paid to Test AI Products

Earn an average of $100 per test by reviewing AI-first product experiences and sharing your feedback.

    Tell us about you. Enroll in the course.

      This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Check our privacy policy and