Popular Apps With Bad UX and the Simple Fixes They Keep Ignoring
Explore top responsive web design companies building mobile-friendly, high-performance websites.
Some of the most used apps in the world are also some of the most frustrating to use. Not because of what they do, but because of how they make you do it.
Bad UX does not always mean a broken product. It means a product that makes you work harder than you should. Confusing navigation, notifications you never asked for, features buried three menus deep, or a form that asks the same question twice. These are the small frictions that quietly drive users away.
88 per cent of users are less likely to return to an app after a bad experience. For platforms with millions of users, that kind of friction translates directly into lost engagement, damaged trust, and real revenue walking out the door.
What makes this frustrating is that most of these problems have clear, simple fixes. Here are some of the most widely criticised apps with bad UX and exactly what they could do about it.
1. Workday: Applying for a Job Should Not Feel Like a Punishment
Workday is one of the most criticised apps with bad UX examples, widely used by companies to manage job applications.
Users are forced to manually retype education and work history for every application, even when that information already exists in their uploaded CV. The autofill feature exists but misfires constantly, and most users end up correcting everything by hand anyway.
The result is a 1.1 rating on Trustpilot. One Vice President of Software Development publicly stated he had stopped applying to roles that required Workday because the process was too frustrating to continue.
The fix: Remove any field that duplicates what is already in the CV. Keep only what the employer actually needs. Glassdoor does this well — contact details, a CV upload, and employer-specific questions. Faster, cleaner, and far less likely to make candidates drop off halfway through.
2. WhatsApp: Delete for Everyone Does Not Actually Delete
WhatsApp is one of the most downloaded apps in the world and for most tasks its experience is clean and easy. But one widely used feature has been misleading users for years.
The delete for everyone option sounds exactly like what it promises. You sent something to the wrong person, you delete it, it disappears. Except it does not disappear. WhatsApp replaces the message with a prompt that reads this message was deleted, which tells the recipient that something was sent and then removed. The whole point of the feature, quietly unsending a message, is completely undermined.
This is a UX copy problem. The feature does not behave the way its name implies, and users only discover this after the awkward moment has already happened.
The fix: Rename the feature to accurately reflect what it actually does. Something like mark message as deleted sets the right expectation upfront. The stronger long term fix is to make the feature work the way Telegram does, where messages genuinely disappear for both parties without leaving any trace behind.
3. LinkedIn: A Notification System Nobody Asked For
LinkedIn is one of several popular apps with bad UX where notifications should surface what matters most, like messages and job opportunities. In practice, they pull from at least 13 different streams, all landing in the same place. A message from a hiring manager ends up buried next to an alert that someone you worked with eight years ago liked a post.
Fixing it is painful. Settings are scattered across multiple sub-menus with dozens of individual toggles. Even after switching everything off, emails keep arriving because LinkedIn uses multiple sender addresses. A 2025 report identified it as the most unsubscribed email service, with over 10,000 users marking it as spam.LinkedIn is one of several popular apps with bad UX that overwhelm users with excessive notifications.
The fix: Reduce notification volume by default and surface only what is genuinely useful. A single settings page with a one-click quiet mode would solve most of the frustration without a significant rebuild.
4. Microsoft Teams: Too Much Happening on One Screen
Microsoft Teams is used by organisations across the world for day to day communication. But its interface remains a consistent source of frustration, especially for people using it for the first time.
The main navigation sidebar sits on the left alongside a secondary sidebar, a horizontal menu runs across the top, and a sub-chat panel competes for space on the same screen. For large organisations, this interface shows why custom software product development must simplify workflows instead of overwhelming users with features. New users frequently struggle to find their way around during their first few days, which pushes some towards simpler tools entirely.
The separation between Teams and Chat is a recurring complaint. Users are often unsure which one to use for which purpose, and the layout does little to guide them in the right direction.
The fix: Add a permanent, clearly visible toggle to collapse the secondary navigation panel rather than hiding it behind a cursor hover. Simplify the distinction between Teams and Chat with clearer labels and a stronger visual hierarchy. Giving the interface more breathing room would make onboarding significantly smoother without removing any functionality.
5. Snapchat: Fixing Something That Was Not Broken
Snapchat’s 2018 redesign remains one of the most discussed mobile apps with bad UX redesign examples.
The update merged stories and private messages into a single view, creating a confusing layout with no clear navigation. Users who had been on the platform for years suddenly did not know where anything was. The backlash was immediate, vocal, and large scale.
The lesson here is not that redesigns are bad. It is that redesigning without testing with real users first is a gamble that rarely pays off. When an app already has an engaged, habitual audience, radical changes to familiar patterns tend to generate frustration rather than excitement.
The fix: Test significant interface changes with real users before rolling them out to everyone. Gradual releases and opt in previews give users the chance to adjust and provide feedback before a change becomes permanent. Design that evolves gradually tends to hold users. Design that revolutionises overnight tends to lose them.
6. Amazon: When More Becomes Less
Amazon is the largest online retailer in the world. Its product pages, however, are a textbook example of what happens when a layout tries to do too many things at once.
Product pages are packed with sponsored listings, personalised recommendations, customer questions, review summaries, seller comparisons, video demonstrations, and promotional banners. The crowded layout highlights why conversion-focused website development should guide users toward action instead of distracting them.
The irony is that Amazon’s entire business depends on people completing purchases. Yet the design of its product pages consistently adds friction to that exact process by crowding the path to checkout with distractions.
The fix: Design the product page around one clear action: buying the product. Recommendations and additional content belong on the page, but they should support the purchase rather than compete with it. A cleaner visual hierarchy with less noise between the product and the buy button would directly improve conversion rates.
The crowded layout highlights why conversion-focused website development should guide users toward action instead of distracting them.
7. Instagram: Showing Users Content They Did Not Choose
Instagram started as a photo sharing app built around the people and accounts you chose to follow. Over time it has shifted in ways that have frustrated a significant portion of its original user base.
The push towards Reels moved photo content down the feed and changed the feel of the platform in ways that alienated photographers and creators who had built their presence there. The feed increasingly surfaces content from accounts users have never followed, making it harder to keep up with the people they actually wanted to see.
Muting content without unfollowing accounts is not straightforward, and switching to a chronological feed is not a simple option.
The fix: Give users real control over what they see. A clear toggle between an algorithmic feed and a chronological one would address the most common complaint immediately. Allowing users to filter content types without having to unfollow accounts would restore the sense of control that made the platform worth building an audience on in the first place.
8. Spotify: Features That Exist but Cannot Be Found
Spotify delivers a generally strong music listening experience. But it has a consistent habit of hiding useful features in places most users will never think to look.
Song credits, queue management, and certain playlist tools are buried deep inside sub-menus rather than placed where users would naturally reach for them. Spotify’s hidden features are a reminder that successful MVP development is not about adding features but making them easy to discover and use.
The inconsistency between the mobile app and the desktop version compounds the problem. Actions that are straightforward on one platform become confusing or unavailable on the other, creating a disjointed experience across devices.
The fix: Place commonly used features at the moments in the experience where users are most likely to need them. Song credits belong on the now playing screen. Queue management should be one tap away. A feature that exists but cannot be found delivers no value to the user and no differentiation for the product.
What All of These Apps Have in Common
Looking across every example here, the same patterns keep reappearing. Steps that could be removed. Features that do not behave the way their names suggest. Notifications that overwhelm rather than inform. Screens cluttered with elements competing for attention all at once.
The underlying cause is usually the same. Companies prioritise adding new features and chasing growth metrics over improving the experience people already have. But users feel the difference every time they open the app.
The frustrating part is that most of these fixes are not complicated. They do not require full redesigns or months of engineering time. They require listening to real users, testing changes before releasing them, and being willing to simplify instead of pile on.
AI-IoT Geeks Builds Digital Products Users Actually Enjoy Using
Most UX problems do not happen because companies lack features. They happen because products are built without enough focus on how real users interact with them every day.
At AI-IoT Geeks, we help businesses create digital experiences that are faster, cleaner, and easier to use .From reducing friction in customer journeys to improving navigation, onboarding, and conversions, our approach focuses on building products that users can understand without confusion. Whether it is a business website, SaaS platform, mobile application, or enterprise software solution, we create scalable digital products designed around usability and long-term growth.
If your platform is struggling with engagement, retention, or conversion issues caused by poor UX, investing in user-focused product development can directly improve how customers interact with your business online.
Improve UX Before Users Leave Your App
Book a Free Strategy Call at aiiotgeeks.com
Have any questions in mind
Frequently Asked Questions?
What makes an app have bad UX?
Bad UX happens when a product makes users work harder than they should. This includes confusing navigation, too many steps to complete a simple task, unclear labels, notification overload, and features that do not behave the way they appear to.
Can a popular app still have bad UX?
Absolutely. Many of the most widely used apps in the world have well documented UX problems. Popularity means people are using the product despite its friction, not that the friction does not exist.
How does bad UX affect a business?
It increases drop off rates, reduces engagement, damages brand trust, and pushes users towards competitors. Poor UX costs businesses far more than the investment needed to fix it.
What is the most common UX mistake apps make?
Overcomplicating simple tasks is the most consistent pattern. Whether that is a form asking for the same information twice, a feature buried three levels deep, or a notification system with no easy way to turn it off, the root problem is the same: the product is not respecting the user’s time.
How do you fix bad UX without a full redesign?
Start by identifying where users drop off or express frustration. Many improvements come from targeted changes to copy, navigation labels, form length, or notification defaults. A focused UX audit will surface the highest impact fixes without requiring a product rebuild from scratch.