←back to thread

Pixar's Render Farm

(twitter.com)
382 points brundolf | 1 comments | 02 Jan 21 19:56 UTC | HN request time: 0.692s | source
Show context
hadrien01 ◴[02 Jan 21 20:11 UTC] No.25616026[source]▶
For those that can't stand Twitter's UI: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1345146328058269696.html
replies(7): >>25616111 #>>25616482 #>>25616748 #>>25617285 #>>25617838 #>>25618314 #>>25618916 #
happytoexplain ◴[02 Jan 21 20:21 UTC] No.25616111[source]▶
Thank you. All I saw was a post with zero context, followed by a reply, followed by another reply using a different reply delineator (a horizontal break instead of a vertical line??), followed by nothing. It just ends. It's hard to believe this is real and intended.
replies(3): >>25616374 #>>25616499 #>>25618244 #
naikrovek ◴[02 Jan 21 21:03 UTC] No.25616499[source]▶
It's amazing to me that people find twitter difficult to read... I mean it's not perfect but it's not an ovaltine decoder ring, either.

Just ... Scroll ... Down ... Click where it says "read more" or "show more replies"

You're human; THE most adaptable creature known. Adapt!

I'm not saying that twitter UX is perfect, or even good. I AM saying that it is usable.

replies(5): >>25616543 #>>25616610 #>>25616612 #>>25618116 #>>25618619 #
xtracto ◴[02 Jan 21 21:15 UTC] No.25616612[source]▶
Twitter was designed to have 280 characters max per message. This means that for this kind of long format text, the amount of Signal-to-Noise ratio of having a large number of "tweets" is pretty low.

The amount of stuff your brain has to filter in the form of user name, user tweet handle, additional tagged handlers, UI menus, UI buttons for replying, retweeting, liking, etc on every single code snippet makes your brain work way more than it should to read a page of text.

Just imagine if I had written this exact text in 3 separate HackerNews comments, and prepended each with a 1/ 2/ 3/ text, in addition to all the message UI, it would have been more difficult to read than a simple piece of text.

replies(2): >>25616636 #>>25616768 #
naikrovek ◴[02 Jan 21 21:19 UTC] No.25616636[source]▶
You all are perfect delicate flowers that need things to be just right in order to use them, then? Is that what you're saying?

Because that's what I'm getting from you.

replies(4): >>25616892 #>>25616907 #>>25617147 #>>25618104 #
1. NikolaNovak ◴[02 Jan 21 21:50 UTC] No.25616892[source]▶
I mean,yes? :-)

If I'm going to use something, it should be intuitive and usable. It should be fit for its purpose, especially with a myriad of single and multi purpose tools available to all. This doesn't feel like something I should justify too hard :-)

Twitter is not a necessity of life. I don't have to use it. They want me to use it and if so they can/should make it usable.

Its paradigm and user interface don't work for me personally (and particularly when people try to fit an article into something explicitly designed for a single sentence - it feels like a misuse of a tool,like hammering a screw) so I don't use it. And that's ok!

I don't feel they are morally obligated to make it usable by me. It's a private platform and they can do as they please.

But my wife is a store manager and taught me that "feedback is a gift" - if a customer will leave the store and never come back,she'd rather know why, rather then remain ignorant.

She may or may not choose to address it but being aware and informed is better than being ignorant of the reasons.

So at the end of it, rather than down vote, let me ask what is the actual crux of your argument? People shouldn't be discriminate? They should use optional things they dislike? They shouldn't share their preferences and feedback? Twitter is a great tool for long format essays? Or something we all may be missing?