> once set up, very easy to build, no “design” required
Which is why they then get thrown around thoughtlessly. It becomes easy to pretend to have solved a problem using a toast instead of actually solving it.
Generally I have treated toasts as reassurance rather than important information
Like little 'saved' notifications when clicking through tabs, or email sent after clicking a send email button that might leave you on the same page
Web sites tend to over inform you of what's happening I like toasts (though I no longer use them since they're it of fashion) simply because you can disregard them
This is a terrible overview. The actual primary benefit of toasts is that they provide feedback on low-importance events without requiring the user to interact with them and without permanently taking up UI space. The web application I use most frequently would be infuriating if I had to deal with a modal window every time a toast would have been used, and UI space is at a premium for useful functionality, so occupying a permanent spot to relay those messages isn't a good solution either.
I wish software developers could drop this dogmatism. Same as the old Goto considered harmful trope outliving its usefulness and all that. It's always black and white - "people can misuse this tool, so this tool is inherently bad and should be eliminated from usage completely" - rather than acknowledging that many tools have great use cases even if they can also be abused.
- once set up, very easy to build, no “design” required
Toast cons:
- easy to miss
- at risk of layout issues (overlaying other information)
The tradeoff is real, but if the resources allow, I’d drop all toasts.