No seriously, if it sucks so much, why haven't users responded by going somewhere else, thus incentivizing sites to behave well?
No seriously, if it sucks so much, why haven't users responded by going somewhere else, thus incentivizing sites to behave well?
But, it's still something worth probing into: if it really does make the user experience worse -- and I agree it does -- why haven't people punished those sites by going elsewhere?
My best guess is that it's like bad customer service: it bugs people, but it's not really the differentiating factor when choosing a product/service provider.
I've met many young people who still default to pen-and-paper for things like note-taking. It's tempting to dismiss them as luddites, but I can't exactly blame them, given how much I know about just how user-hostile modern computer software and hardware can be.
In becoming ad revenue maximizers, taking for-granted assumptions on audience, this situation doesn't optimize for serving the audience well. And since their models are to provide content in bulk, it keeps users served "well enough" to keep coming back, as opposed to less-funded alternatives which might provide a better UX, but don't provide the bulk content that monied sites can.
Fundamentally, people visit sites and endure bad UX if the content is there to draw them. The utility cost of bad UX often isn't the dominating factor.
Yes, but again, that's only true because apparently the UX isn't actually bad enough to push away a significant chunk of their userbase.
> Fundamentally, people visit sites and endure bad UX if the content is there to draw them. The utility cost of bad UX often isn't the dominating factor.
Agreed. But you could also interpret this as, "people don't mind this type of UX that much".
USA Today definitely would not have survived another 5 years with 25 second page loading times. Or at least, such an old website wouldn't have generated enough revenue to survive long term (and USA Today would put their content on something else like Apple News, Youtube, etc)
The news experience through websites is so bad that I don't read news on the WWW anymore.
That is one tread bare cop out.
When the choice is to go without completely, few will do so (and those that do will often get marketing blitzed as "luddites").
The market isn’t magic, and the market we actually have is far from free.