Because maintaining N different interfaces is hard?
No matter how big you get, coordination between products is a hard problem to deal with (more social than technical).
No matter how big you get, coordination between products is a hard problem to deal with (more social than technical).
Each news feed is totally personalized. This is done without having to worry about maintaining "N" feeds, it's built into the system, built into the approach.
Why is the design something that needs to be fragmented into buckets? This is a broader choice, accepting that all users need to be on some defined path.
You can measure and improve metrics without being concerned about the particular CSS file being delivered to each person.
The old design did not work across a set of devices. The new design works across a greater number of these device.
Please suggest an alternative.
note: device could mean anything from phone to small netbook.
I do find it a little ironic that JZ has taken to Medium to say this, since that platform shares a lot of the visual sensibility with the old FB feed - titles sitting inside the image frame, minimalist icon-driven design and so on.
Being able to save and display options or settings has been done...at scale.
Lots of software development is hard. Whilst maintaining one interface is easier, they already serve and maintain different interfaces (Android, iPhone and web). What's another subset or two for the web? Responsiveness can only do so much. The article makes out as though the majority of users are using 'legacy' hardware... even if that were the case, there's still hundreds of millions of people that are using decent screens, peripherals etc, which they're not doing "whatever's best for the people" for.