2 ms·
I feel like there are trade offs. With the image approach, I can tell what I'm engaging with at a glance instead of a few clicks and page loads. I know whether
by fny 9y ago
I feel like there are trade offs. With the image approach, I can tell what I'm engaging with at a glance instead of a few clicks and page loads. I know whether a link is a blog post, repo, promotion, article, tweet without having to decipher the domain, and I can even tell whether a site will accost me for my email address.
On the other hand, one could argue a lot of what the images tell can be inferred from looking at the title and metadata alone, but this has definitely reduced my "false positive" clicks. Vanilla HN wins hands down for information density.
- piotrkubisa 9y agoI totally agree with you. I have positive experience to see preview of the website, because now I could recognize what is behind the link. Personally, I really like "native" HN which is just simple, fast and straightforward to use, and I definitely wouldn't be satisfied to use the Vue-version on daily basis. I think website preview (history-less, pre-rendered and cached) might be a possible field for interest for startups (pocket, raindrop etc.) and their browser extensions to manage bookmarks in browser, because they currently generate (and cache) image previews on their own so they can offer website preview as feature. This feature also reminds me Force Touch [1]. [1]: http://osxdaily.com/2016/02/23/preview-web-page-links-safari-mac-multitouch/ http://osxdaily.com/2016/02/23/preview-web-page-links-safari...