Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

dcurt.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 231 posts

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#191

Post by JimmyM »

jey wrote: post #170
redorb wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vincent Flanders called this mystery meat navigation [1] and has a whole site about webpages that suck.. (a bit dated) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mystery_meat_navigation http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/mysterymeatnavigation.html

Some people have asked, "Where are the sites?" Well, the menu above should aim you in the right direction. Too bad that Web Pages That Suck sucks.

You should read the FAQ, http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/faq.html, the design is deliberate.

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#192

Post by khafra »

baddox wrote: post #164
kenko wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of room between "exist to make money" and "must make money in order to exist". Like, a staggering amount of room.

I don't really see much of a difference. If a company must make money to continue to exist, then I think it's reasonable to say that company "exists to make money." Of course, that doesn't mean is exists only to make money.

The practical difference disappears when your operating margin is 0. When you have money left over after paying your essential expenses, though, you can do stuff. Like, if you're Microsoft and you have 60 billion in cash, you can have a big R&D department that sometimes engages in blue-sky research.

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#193

Post by ams6110 »

harryf wrote: post #48
modeless wrote: post #37

This article makes one big unstated assumption: that users wanted the news feed to change. In fact, users didn't want the news feed to change. Users hate change. And when I say that I don't mean that users are stupid and hate good things. Users have good reasons for hating change that's forced on them: it reduces the value of their previous experience and requires extra time and effort on their part; effort that they…

Would be really interesting to put a number on "users hate change". Based on my own experience at a company where we actually researched this stuff, the number I would forward is 30%. Given an existing user base, on average 30% will hate any given change to their user experience, independent of whether the that experience is actually worse or better.

That's probably about right, maybe a little high for hating enough to do something different. I quit using MS Office when the "Ribbon" was introduced, but most people I know just sort of sighed and kept with it.

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#194

Post by langarto »

eevilspock wrote: post #176
steven2012 wrote: post #79

This is essentially what happened in my group when I was at Yahoo. Our group spent several months on a redesign that made it significantly more modern and easier to use. After it went live, though, this decreased the number of ad clicks by a significant number, and the people in charge hurriedly reverted all the changes back, since they needed to make their revenue numbers in order to make their bonus. When you are s…

Nearly everyone has bought into the utter bullshit that advertising makes the web free. This delusion buries not only the fact that we have made a deal with the devil, but also that the deal really sucks. What we traded our souls for we don’t even get. The web would be both cheaper and better if we just paid for what we use straight up. And more importantly, society would be better. I'll explain all of these. IT'S NO…

This is the most insightful comment that I have ever read in HackerNews.

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#195

Post by zimpenfish »

mehwoot wrote: post #161
wisty wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Companies like Yahoo exist to make money - or, at least, they must continue to make money in order to continue existing. Hows that working for Yahoo now? Actually, that's kind of disingenuous. Google optimises for less clicks per user, because Google is a site for people who want to get stuff done. Yahoo and Facebook are time-wasters. And unlike Yahoo, I can't see it ever transitioning to anything other than a time…

Hows that working for Yahoo now? Pretty well, considering they are still around more than a decade after they stopped being "cool". They're not trendy in tech circles, they are just a business that makes money. Yahoo and Facebook are time-wasters... Time-wasters are basically unprofitable Yeah, unprofitable to the tune of $600 million a year. That's Yahoo's net profit last year. I swear to god, the blindness of peopl…

I can't find any links ("Yahoo finance 2013" is exceedingly useless) but wasn't that $600M partially/mostly from them selling off stakes in things like AliBaba and not from the core business?

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#196

Post by mcherm »

z3phyr wrote: post #173
baudehlo wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Modern apps don't have a save function. There's no need for it.

All the apps must have 'Manual Override'. Save is desirable in ethical scenarios.

What?

I don't comprehend what you mean by "manual override", nor how saving can have any ethical implications whatsoever.

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#197

Post by crazychrome »

Interesting read. it proves one of my arguments against fb: there is not too much real value to end users.

there is no such thing in the world like "performing too well". if a better design led to less user engagements, it means the product, in its bare bone, not valuable to users.

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#198

Post by crazychrome »

eevilspock wrote: post #176
steven2012 wrote: post #79

This is essentially what happened in my group when I was at Yahoo. Our group spent several months on a redesign that made it significantly more modern and easier to use. After it went live, though, this decreased the number of ad clicks by a significant number, and the people in charge hurriedly reverted all the changes back, since they needed to make their revenue numbers in order to make their bonus. When you are s…

Nearly everyone has bought into the utter bullshit that advertising makes the web free. This delusion buries not only the fact that we have made a deal with the devil, but also that the deal really sucks. What we traded our souls for we don’t even get. The web would be both cheaper and better if we just paid for what we use straight up. And more importantly, society would be better. I'll explain all of these. IT'S NO…

Advertising is not the worst. In-App purchasing is. It turns the whole thing into endless ad stream. Every purchase confirms the success of previous efforts as ad, then what to do next? hit the f*cking user harder!

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#199

Post by xentronium »

ekianjo wrote: post #116
isbadawi wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Settings -> General -> Button labels. You can choose between "Icons" and "Text".

Thanks for this! I was not even aware the option existed. Done!

You might also like other advice from this article: http://jasoncrawford.org/2012/04/how-to-cope-with-the-gmail-...

At least for me it made gmail bearable again.

Re: Whatever goes up, that’s what we do

#200

Post by pbhjpbhj »

baddox wrote: post #164
kenko wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of room between "exist to make money" and "must make money in order to exist". Like, a staggering amount of room.

I don't really see much of a difference. If a company must make money to continue to exist, then I think it's reasonable to say that company "exists to make money." Of course, that doesn't mean is exists only to make money.

Do you consider a company like Raspberry Pi or Oxfam to "exist to make money"? They certainly need money to exist.
Post reply on HN