Introducing the new Google+ • Hacker News Board

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#191

Post by moonchrome » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 2:25 AM UTC

ksk wrote: post #185

moonchrome wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ >You dumbass. You thought you needed media queries to be responsive, but no. Responsive means that it responds to whatever motherfucking screensize it's viewed on. This site doesn't care if you're on an iMac or a motherfucking Tamagotchi. Except that it's really hard to read on a wide screen. I get it - it's a satire - but it goes too far and fails to make a convincing point because…

>Except that it's really hard to read on a wide screen. I think the issue is - who gets to decide how wide the content is. Is it the user or the website? Or to put it another way, does the act of maximizing a window represent an intent or does it represent a default error state that needs to be worked around by laying out the content in a different way. I think that the user should get to decide how wide they want th…

>I think the issue is - who gets to decide how wide the content is. Is it the user or the website? Or to put it another way, does the act of maximizing a window represent an intent or does it represent a default error state that needs to be worked around by laying out the content in a different way.

This is why CSS exists - it separates style from content - if you want what that site has just disable all CSS and you'll get raw content.

>What are those non-subjective reasons?

There are things like optimal line length based on eye travel distance and a bunch of "defaults" that have been found trough centuries of experience in design/print. I don't do design professionally so I don't remember the exact rules but I did take design classes back in high school so I know they exist - I'll let someone who's an expert fill in on what they are :D

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#192

Post by jacquesm » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 2:26 AM UTC

yeukhon wrote: post #137

scholia wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Googlers and Linux users! Quite a few photographers there as well, though I haven't looked for a year or two...

I seriously want to ask Linus why he's so into G+.

This should answer your question:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaj6RLfIZIE

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#193

Post by moonchrome » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 2:28 AM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #150

moonchrome wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ >You dumbass. You thought you needed media queries to be responsive, but no. Responsive means that it responds to whatever motherfucking screensize it's viewed on. This site doesn't care if you're on an iMac or a motherfucking Tamagotchi. Except that it's really hard to read on a wide screen. I get it - it's a satire - but it goes too far and fails to make a convincing point because…

Why not make your window narrower?

Do I really have to explain the value of sane defaults to a developer :D

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#194

Post by moonchrome » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 2:34 AM UTC

Liru wrote: post #98

moonchrome wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ >You dumbass. You thought you needed media queries to be responsive, but no. Responsive means that it responds to whatever motherfucking screensize it's viewed on. This site doesn't care if you're on an iMac or a motherfucking Tamagotchi. Except that it's really hard to read on a wide screen. I get it - it's a satire - but it goes too far and fails to make a convincing point because…

You may be interested in http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/

Yes that really drives in on those points glad someone took the time to actually present them like that :)

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#195

Post by joeevans1000 » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 2:40 AM UTC

Google+ is back? This is like where Sigourney Weaver gets into her escape pod in Alien, only to find the alien there.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#196

Post by mikeash » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 3:12 AM UTC

moonchrome wrote: post #193

mikeash wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not make your window narrower?

Do I really have to explain the value of sane defaults to a developer :D

Of course. Developers are the ones who always say "just configure it to your liking." It's the normal folk who need sane defaults!

Slightly more seriously, maybe the sane default should be a sane window size for the browser. Not everything needs to be fullscreen. Or maybe the browser window could be wide but could present a narrower viewport in appropriate circumstances. There has to be something better than having every web site separately specify whatever it thinks is a reasonable reading width.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#197

Post by BoppreH » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 3:14 AM UTC

Communities were front and center in Orkut, Google's old social network. For some reason it only made success in a few countries, but absolutely dominated in those (Brazil predominantly).

This literally feels like a rollback to their old social network.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#198

Post by moonchrome » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 3:27 AM UTC

mikeash wrote: post #196

moonchrome wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do I really have to explain the value of sane defaults to a developer :D

Of course. Developers are the ones who always say "just configure it to your liking." It's the normal folk who need sane defaults! Slightly more seriously, maybe the sane default should be a sane window size for the browser. Not everything needs to be fullscreen. Or maybe the browser window could be wide but could present a narrower viewport in appropriate circumstances. There has to be something better than having e…

I guess but a) backwards compatibility probably comes in to play b) can you imagine the level of bikeshedding

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#199

Post by efuquen » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 3:38 AM UTC

macintux wrote: post #124

efuquen wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were many well established search engines readily available when they launched search to.

There were exactly zero good search engines at the time, however. Google was exponentially better than anything else from day 1.

I'm not really trying to say anything about the quality of these products at launch compared to competitors. The parent post made a claim that since there was already a lot of innovative products available Google can't do anything special by launching similar applications. I say that's completely off base when you look at the product that made Google one of the largest tech companies in the world fits exactly into this category. It was not doing anything fundamentally different from other search engines at the time. It just did in a much better way, so much so that people overwhelmingly switched; and they were able to make way more money of these users as well.

Re: Introducing the new Google+

#200

Post by ocdtrekkie » Wed, Nov 18, 2015, 3:48 AM UTC

bronson wrote: post #22

Charise Strandberg via Google+ Daniel Brinneman shared this via Google+ Antonio Valdés via Google+ I see Google+'s commenting is still drowned out by sharing notifications. Google, there's a reason everyone turned off trackbacks ten years ago. It's just noise for anyone reading that page to filter out.

It really depends how you use it. For instance, probably 70% of my posts are technically reshares, but the majority of them have my own comments or thoughts on a given topic. Sometimes my comments are longer than those on the original source.