3 ms·

Goodreads has not changed in 10 years. See comparison pic of 2010 vs 2020: https://twitter.com/aminozuur/status/1338037049941757953 https://twitter.com/aminozuu

Goodreads has not changed in 10 years. See comparison pic of 2010 vs 2020: https://twitter.com/aminozuur/status/1338037049941757953 https://twitter.com/aminozuur/status/1338037049941757953 It's sad that Goodreads way forward is to stifle competition, rather than innovate.

Mediterraneo10 6y ago
I don't mind no changes to the UI at all. The Goodreads UI is information-dense and very powerful to use on a desktop/laptop. Alternatives, like the Readng site linked to in the posted article, are often examples of that annoying trend in web design UI where the limitations of mobile-phone touchscreens are forced on all users. Where Goodreads has really failed to change is something not easily visible in pithy screenshots: there are a lot of bugs and missing functionality with regard to book metadata, but these flaws are something you don't quite grasp unless you become a Goodreads Librarian.
- scoot_718 6y ago
  Goodreads is complete garbage, they can't even sort a list of ratings properly.
lars512 6y ago
I find their poor recommendations the most obvious issue here. They have so, so much reading data on me, even a massive list of books I'm interested in, but they are still so off.
- mcintyre1994 6y ago
  They’re probably using Amazon’s recommendation system which - at least in my experience - is pretty terrible with books. It might just be because I’m in the category of people who constantly get recommendations to buy things I’ve just bought and whatever puts me in that category stops them being able to make interesting recommendations, but it’s always pretty naff. I think the only good book recommendations I get from Amazon are authors I’ve specifically followed, or the monthly free early read choices which I don’t think are actually targeted at all
fireattack 6y ago
This comparison shows nothing but they have a consistent UI, which probably isn't a bad thing to begin with. And even that is a stretch, you can see there are plenty of adjustments in the layout, and the right one looks fine by today's standard.
- aminozuur 6y ago
  "the right one looks fine by today's standard" I disagree. It might be subjective, or a matter of taste.
AlchemistCamp 6y ago
Goodreads has a nice UX, though. The site linked to by the OP is painful to use.
efdee 6y ago
Not changed? I mean, those two screenshots kind of look similar, but are still totally different to me.
bzb6 6y ago
Things don’t need to change constantly. If it works it must be left as it is.
campl3r 6y ago
That's actually what I really appreciate about Goodreads. Yes they stopped innovating, fixing bugs, etc., but at least they didn't changed their design to any if the mobile first, low information density crap.

Mediterraneo10 6y ago

I don't mind no changes to the UI at all. The Goodreads UI is information-dense and very powerful to use on a desktop/laptop. Alternatives, like the Readng site linked to in the posted article, are often examples of that annoying trend in web design UI where the limitations of mobile-phone touchscreens are forced on all users. Where Goodreads has really failed to change is something not easily visible in pithy screenshots: there are a lot of bugs and missing functionality with regard to book metadata, but these flaws are something you don't quite grasp unless you become a Goodreads Librarian.

scoot_718 6y ago
Goodreads is complete garbage, they can't even sort a list of ratings properly.

lars512 6y ago

I find their poor recommendations the most obvious issue here. They have so, so much reading data on me, even a massive list of books I'm interested in, but they are still so off.

mcintyre1994 6y ago
They’re probably using Amazon’s recommendation system which - at least in my experience - is pretty terrible with books. It might just be because I’m in the category of people who constantly get recommendations to buy things I’ve just bought and whatever puts me in that category stops them being able to make interesting recommendations, but it’s always pretty naff. I think the only good book recommendations I get from Amazon are authors I’ve specifically followed, or the monthly free early read choices which I don’t think are actually targeted at all

fireattack 6y ago

This comparison shows nothing but they have a consistent UI, which probably isn't a bad thing to begin with. And even that is a stretch, you can see there are plenty of adjustments in the layout, and the right one looks fine by today's standard.

aminozuur 6y ago
"the right one looks fine by today's standard" I disagree. It might be subjective, or a matter of taste.

AlchemistCamp 6y ago

Goodreads has a nice UX, though. The site linked to by the OP is painful to use.

efdee 6y ago

Not changed? I mean, those two screenshots kind of look similar, but are still totally different to me.

bzb6 6y ago

Things don’t need to change constantly. If it works it must be left as it is.

campl3r 6y ago

That's actually what I really appreciate about Goodreads. Yes they stopped innovating, fixing bugs, etc., but at least they didn't changed their design to any if the mobile first, low information density crap.