4 ms·
How exactly did she dispel the lower revenue assumption? There is not a sentence in this article that does that.
by BigBadBionicBoy 13y ago
How exactly did she dispel the lower revenue assumption?
There is not a sentence in this article that does that.
- spicyj 13y ago"The old design we tested last year would actually have been positive for revenue. But that’s not a reason to ship a worse design."
- ghayes 13y agoShe states it directly: "The old design we tested last year would actually have been positive for revenue."
- xophe 13y agoNo. Neither the old design nor the design dcurtis mentioned are current. But the current design is more similar to the old design.
- kosievdmerwe 13y agoI'm not sure what you mean? She is pretty clearly referring to the redesign from 2013 versus the design before that.
- swah 13y agoSo what Curtis says is false? Then did he get this from? "After an investigation into the problem by Facebook’s data team, they discovered that the new News Feed was performing too well. It was performing so well from a design standpoint that users no longer felt the need to browse areas outside of the News Feed as often, so they were spending less time on the site."
- stephencanon 13y agoSomeone presenting speculation as fact ON THE INTERNET? Never. I'm being snarky, but it certainly seems that she's in a better position to know what facebooks data and reasoning were.
- far33d 13y agoYou're right. We should disregard a first hand account and instead believe second or third hand rumors.
- swah 13y agoI'm just saying that he states it as a fact, like someone on the Facebook team had told him.