3 ms·
Counterpoint: their UX works perfectly well for them (see: $690m in revenue) and any proposed overhaul would carry potentially disastrous costs (see: Digg's sit
by trowawee 9y ago
Counterpoint: their UX works perfectly well for them (see: $690m in revenue) and any proposed overhaul would carry potentially disastrous costs (see: Digg's site-killing redesign). Redesigning for the sake of change is not inherently good.
Also, on a personal level, I've come to appreciate CL's design, and I very much appreciate its consistency. I don't use CL all the time - I go to it sometimes for things like furniture I know I can't get too attached to, or rental listings. It took a little time investment maybe 15 years ago to learn how the site worked, but once you know how it works, it's fairly easy to navigate, and they have never required me to relearn the site, no matter how long I go without using it. There's serious value in that. Add in the network effect that's killing the new apps trying to challenge it and you have a behemoth.
- bpicolo 9y ago> Digg's site-killing redesign Wasn't that all because they entirely changed the content model though? It wasn't just a UI change. Wasn't it because paid-for-junk was going to be most of what was in your face or something of that nature?
- trowawee 9y agoSure, but that's a UX change, and that's what the parent was suggesting for CL.
- wingerlang 9y agoJust because they both are UX changes doesn't mean the parent was suggesting the same changes.