4 ms·

One thing I absolutely cannot understand is the "price range" functionality seems to be broken as well. Maybe it's the same root cause and/or change which broke

One thing I absolutely cannot understand is the "price range" functionality seems to be broken as well. Maybe it's the same root cause and/or change which broke price sorting but when I put in a range of say $100-$200 searching for "network switch" the first result is $240, the 2nd result $90, and the 3rd result $120 and legitimate results go on for tens of pages. So it's not that there isn't anything for sale in that range, it's not that there weren't enough results to display so they needed to pad the numbers, and it's (seemingly?) not that they are just trying to push a higher dollar sale... it's just plain broken?

_kulang 3y ago
Probably the preferred suppliers/partners or sponsored products that are close to the asked range that show up and are prioritised
- flakes 3y ago
  Then call the category ~200. IMO This is prime enshitification. You cant search for anything reliably any more. You dont get to see what youre actually searching for.. just whatever a company thinks they can make more profit off of.
  - _kulang 3y ago
    Yep. Google did it with their search and now it’s just what makes the world turn. And they have to be disingenuous about it or else people wouldn’t use it. I think it’s pretty plain and simple - realise this is the case, then vote with your feet I’ve stopped trying to save by online ordering, within reason. If a store has what I need + points me in the right direction and demonstrates they are knowledgeable, they will get my business. 5-10 dollars is not worth saving at the expense of fuelling the enshittification machine. If that makes a huge difference to you, then reevaluate if you actually need the item You’ll end up with less stuff, better stuff, with less hassle and noise, and a relationship to a vendor which may speed up returns and maintenance. As always, pick your poison
Sai_ 3y ago
It isn’t uncommon to say your price band is $100-200, then find something costing $250 which checks all the boxes. In this case, fuzzing prices while presenting results seems like an acceptable trade off.
- jknoepfler 3y ago
  As a user, when I set a price range, I want the search function to return results within that range. I don't want fuzz. I don't want you to second guess me. I want the results I asked for. This is the natural, simple, user-friendly design I want. Don't give me some bullshit instead.
  - FridgeSeal 3y ago
    Agreed. So many modern UX issues are from people presuming what users want, rather than just giving them well-designed tools and getting out of the way.
  - Sai_ 3y ago
    What if you (the user not you you) don’t know what price range will net them the feature set they want? E.g., would you know exactly the price range to pay for a tool set which lets you do general repairs around the house? Should it be ₹100? ₹500? How will a search engine know for sure that you’re an aware customer who knows their price ranges versus a newbie exploring the space? Even google claims to have millions of results per query meaning they, for all their talk about organising the world’s information, don’t know what exactly you want.
    - jknoepfler 3y ago
      As a user, I don't want to be second-guessed. I can explore price ranges on my own, thanks.
      - Sai_ 3y ago
        How do you ever buy flight tickets then? It’s all about trade offs and checkboxes(layovers, specific terminals, airlines, aircraft body types, price ranges, dates, non-stops, insurance, in-flight Wi-Fi, meals, early boarding) etc. Do you first look through the page with all the options, then open different tabs with each unique combination of checkboxes and options enabled/disabled? That must exponentially (literally) harder than simply viewing fuzzy results on screen and pruning the decision tree in your head.
DSMan195276 3y ago
FWIW I just tried that exact search and every item I see listed at above $200 also has a "more buying options" listed on the search page with a price less than $200, so while it's annoying I guess I get the logic. All those options (the ones I see anyway) are used, so when I limit the search to "Condition - New" they all go away.
rqtwteye 3y ago
I don't think it's broken. It's intentional to push you to buy products that give Amazon the highest profit.

_kulang 3y ago

Probably the preferred suppliers/partners or sponsored products that are close to the asked range that show up and are prioritised

flakes 3y ago
Then call the category ~200. IMO This is prime enshitification. You cant search for anything reliably any more. You dont get to see what youre actually searching for.. just whatever a company thinks they can make more profit off of.
- _kulang 3y ago
  Yep. Google did it with their search and now it’s just what makes the world turn. And they have to be disingenuous about it or else people wouldn’t use it. I think it’s pretty plain and simple - realise this is the case, then vote with your feet I’ve stopped trying to save by online ordering, within reason. If a store has what I need + points me in the right direction and demonstrates they are knowledgeable, they will get my business. 5-10 dollars is not worth saving at the expense of fuelling the enshittification machine. If that makes a huge difference to you, then reevaluate if you actually need the item You’ll end up with less stuff, better stuff, with less hassle and noise, and a relationship to a vendor which may speed up returns and maintenance. As always, pick your poison

Sai_ 3y ago

It isn’t uncommon to say your price band is $100-200, then find something costing $250 which checks all the boxes. In this case, fuzzing prices while presenting results seems like an acceptable trade off.

jknoepfler 3y ago
As a user, when I set a price range, I want the search function to return results within that range. I don't want fuzz. I don't want you to second guess me. I want the results I asked for. This is the natural, simple, user-friendly design I want. Don't give me some bullshit instead.
- FridgeSeal 3y ago
  Agreed. So many modern UX issues are from people presuming what users want, rather than just giving them well-designed tools and getting out of the way.
- Sai_ 3y ago
  What if you (the user not you you) don’t know what price range will net them the feature set they want? E.g., would you know exactly the price range to pay for a tool set which lets you do general repairs around the house? Should it be ₹100? ₹500? How will a search engine know for sure that you’re an aware customer who knows their price ranges versus a newbie exploring the space? Even google claims to have millions of results per query meaning they, for all their talk about organising the world’s information, don’t know what exactly you want.
  - jknoepfler 3y ago
    As a user, I don't want to be second-guessed. I can explore price ranges on my own, thanks.
    - Sai_ 3y ago
      How do you ever buy flight tickets then? It’s all about trade offs and checkboxes(layovers, specific terminals, airlines, aircraft body types, price ranges, dates, non-stops, insurance, in-flight Wi-Fi, meals, early boarding) etc. Do you first look through the page with all the options, then open different tabs with each unique combination of checkboxes and options enabled/disabled? That must exponentially (literally) harder than simply viewing fuzzy results on screen and pruning the decision tree in your head.

DSMan195276 3y ago

FWIW I just tried that exact search and every item I see listed at above $200 also has a "more buying options" listed on the search page with a price less than $200, so while it's annoying I guess I get the logic. All those options (the ones I see anyway) are used, so when I limit the search to "Condition - New" they all go away.

rqtwteye 3y ago

I don't think it's broken. It's intentional to push you to buy products that give Amazon the highest profit.