Why Do Some Apps Use a Customized Sharing Interface Instead of the Default One Offered by Apple?

Developing and designing an app is a nuanced process filled with trade-offs. One such decision is whether to use Apple's default sharing interface or a customized one. This choice often comes down to a balance between following established standards and creating a unique user interface (UI) that aligns with the app’s own design philosophy.

Trade Offs in App UI Design

The decision between sticking with Apple's default UI and creating a custom sharing interface is not straightforward. In some cases, using the default UI is the clear choice, as a significant contrast between the app’s design and the standard UI can confuse users. However, in cases where an app's UI doesn't diverge too much from defaults, adopting the standard UI becomes a no-brainer.

There are several reasons why some apps opt for a custom sharing interface. One common reason is cross-platform consistency, where the marketer or developer might want to maintain a uniform appearance across different platforms. Another reason is the input of a designer who believes they have an innovative idea and can convince the team to implement it. While these ideas may seem compelling, they often end up being misguided.

Lastly, there is the Not-Invented-Here (NIH) syndrome, where the development team stubbornly resists using the default UI because it is the default. Despite individual team members' opinions, these choices can potentially hinder user experience and complicate app usage.

It's generally advisable to use non-standard UI features for sharing or other purposes only if you have a truly compelling reason. The primary concern with such customizations is the time and effort users will need to invest in learning the new interface, which can detract from the overall user experience.

When Customization Makes Sense

There are exceptions where a custom sharing interface can make sense, such as when the app has specific sharing needs that cannot be met by the default share sheet. For example, an app might require quicker and easier user interactions, and the standard share sheet might not suffice. However, this logical reasoning is rarely the case.

One of the primary reasons apps use custom share sheets is to achieve aesthetic coherence with their brand. By doing so, they sometimes end up compromising the user experience. This customization often sacrifices the comfort and familiarity that the default share sheet provides, such as clear user guidance and ease of use.

It is important to recognize that the default share sheet has its own issues, including overwhelming or confusing new users and the lack of clarity regarding the ability to reorder or remove options. However, these drawbacks are not significant enough to justify the extensive changes seen in most apps' sharing interfaces.

Conclusion

The decision to use a custom sharing interface versus the default one in apps is crucial for providing a seamless and enjoyable user experience. While innovation and brand coherence are valuable, they should not be pursued at the cost of usability. Always consider the long-term impact on users and strive to balance between following established standards and introducing meaningful, user-friendly customizations.