Hacker News Reader

Comment by Touche | Hacker News Reader

It doesn't matter; worse is better. 1999 Yahoo Mail was not a good user experience, but it (and other web-based mail services) destroyed the likes of Eudora.

Ubiquity >>>>> UX.

View on HN

Well its that, and that the users didn't need to configure a single thing when using the web thingy.

Problem is, imo, that so much of the web assumes a mouse and keyboard. I keep running into "mobile" sites that are so crammed with links and other tap targets that i have no chance to hit the right one on first try with consistency.

...so HN is your first point of call, where the tap targets are so easy on the web first interface...

Content is King

Not for me: HN is awful on a mobile browser, so I use an app (MiniHack). It's so much better than the mobile site that it has become my go-to counterargument whenever someone insists that the mobile web is going to displace apps any day now.

Though, being fair, MiniHack is literally one of the best and most focused apps on my phone! Such an amazing product, was well worth the couple dollars.

HN is an outlier because there's no business model or team of OSS maintainers with motivation to improve it. I can't think of any other sites I visit in the same position.

It's not the only example though, just the one with the widest disparity. Reddit and Tumblr are also both considerably worse experiences on their mobile sites than their apps, assuming you know enough to get the good apps.

I just keep hearing posts about how the mobile web is so clearly superior to apps and it never tallies with the reality on the ground for me.

It used to be awful. Basically you would get the desktop site without resizing, small text, have to zoom etc. It's not like that now. Haven't seen an app that's any good and you don't need one. Site works well in mobile now.

I'd say that ubiquity is a factor of UX.

Not for everyone.

I still use Thunderbird.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com