4 ms·
They probably looked at tik tok, and realized most people consumed recent content like bots. They then calculated the cost of sorting, and realized that it wou
by BiteCode_dev 4y ago
They probably looked at tik tok, and realized most people consumed recent content like bots.
They then calculated the cost of sorting, and realized that it would save them more money than upsetting the users that like the function would cost.
Then, A/B testing confirmed it for a few months.
Then, tada, good bye features.
- wwtrv 4y agoSo if most people supposedly don't use the feature it probably doesn't cost that much to have it. Also now people who actually want to view videos starting from oldest will use a magnitude or two more resources just by needlessly scrolling for 5 minutes. Seems to me that it's more likely that google just has too many employees who just do idiotic/random changes to show that they are actually doing "actual" work...
- simion314 4y ago>They then calculated I mean they have sort by time, so you would just reverse the order. This stinks like GNOME mentality, giant ego designer needs something easy to do to justify it's salary so finds some button/option to remove,
- pixl97 4y agoGoogle: "we have determined that drivers only use their brakes 5% of the time versus the accelerator 60% of the time and therefore have decided to remove brakes from the car"