In my opinion, Security, simple environment, ease of use and speed of transactions, will make the difference.
All of this may seem very simple to generate, but it obviously requires a great deal of effort and work. A clear example of the above is Google. From its inception, Google focused on simplicity, speed, and ease of use. A page that has hardly any information and that won the battle against the entire competition.
At the moment, UNI’s competitors are reloading their websites, in my opinion, with too much information. I think that we should move away from this style.
Let’s look for our own identity, simplicity, the Security that we already provide to all users, speed and low cost in transactions will not continue to grow. From here, we can deploy a whole battery of new products, but maintaining an initial, clear, simple and safe cover
I agree with you, especially on ease-of-use. I don’t know if the Uniswap team will put any new interface that might come out with V3 for a beta test, but if they do they might get some good feedback from the community if we keep this in mind.
Currently, though, the interface is quite simple, probably as simple as they could get it which might be why some competitors seem to emulate the same style Uniswap is using. Would be interesting to know if Uniswap/Hayden Adams designed it first or got the inspiration from another project.
Regarding identity, it’s already quite well established, I’ve assumed the Uni might have originally been short for Universal but was being spun as ‘Unicorn’ as a more engaging and iconic form of branding.
What might be lacking is inducting complete neophytes into using the system, thinking specifically about the gas fees that someone might be able to configure in metamask. I lost small amounts on transaction fees when foolishly messing with the gas limit, trying to save as much eth as possible which, I imagine, is something that novices will frequently try to do.
Quite a few others on the forum have aired difficulties with losing funds or having a transaction that fails with it not being clear where their funds have ended up, which is very bad UX and will probably discourage them from doing self-custody for quite some time, which only serves centralised exchanges. So another step to take might be to try and educate users on how to keep their funds safe and helping them understand what resources they can use to quickly diagnose an issue. Probably not very on-brand for Uniswap, and the impulse from the Uniswap team might be to leave that to creators of wallets like metamask, or to wait for them to look for support on a discord, but developing this kind of educational stuff can build a great deal of trust and develop a loyal cohort of users who might not be so inclined to try other DEXes who they’ve got no trust built-with.