3 ms·
> Instead they were user-friendly at first, Twitter’s experience for users today is the same as it was at the start. The word “user” is key, though. The exper
by PragmaticPulp 5y ago
> Instead they were user-friendly at first,
Twitter’s experience for users today is the same as it was at the start.
The word “user” is key, though. The experience has only changed for people who aren’t yet users (with logged in user accounts) of Twitter.
> A bait and switch, tricking people into relying on them,
This doesn’t really make sense. If you rely on Twitter, you make an account. You can’t really rely on Twitter or even be a user without having an account.
I don’t really expect community platforms to cater to non-users of the community.
- jevoten 5y agoYou're assuming that people with accounts don't care if people without accounts can't read their tweets (and can't read them anonymously), and that for some reason reading Twitter doesn't count as "using" it. Do they not show any ads if you're not logged in?
- HWR_14 5y agoThey don't show you ads based on your phone number's tie in to the real world. That's then problem they want to solve
- kaashif 5y agoI am confused. It seems like there are two definitions of "user" here: someone that uses something, and someone that has an account. It's possible to use Twitter without an account (reading tweets seems like the primary use case of Twitter), and it's possible to have an account that you never use. People in the second case are counted as "inactive users" or, in other words, users that don't use Twitter. When people talk about the UX or UI of a website, they usually aren't talking about whether you have an account or not. It's possible for a website's UX to be bad before you even make an account, e.g. if the sign up page is bad.