Slashdot Mirror
Snapchat Petition Attracts One Million Signatures (bbc.com)
One million people have signed a petition calling on Snapchat to roll back its latest redesign. From a report: The changes were intended to separate interactions with friends from branded content -- including that of celebrities and influencers. Snapchat founder Evan Spiegel wrote in a blog post that he believed blurring the two had contributed to the rise of fake news. However, thousands of Snapchat users say that the new layout is hard to use. Nic Rumsey, who set up the petition, wrote that some are using Virtual Private Network (VPN) apps -- which use servers abroad to mask the location of a device -- in order to access the older version of the platform: "That's how annoying this update has become," he said. "Many 'new features' are useless or defeat the original purposes Snapchat has had for the past years." The petition, posted on the change.org website, is one of several appealing to Snapchat to revert to its previous state.
When you have a single implementation of a protocol, some people are always going to hate it. When you have an open protocol with multiple client implementations, you can choose the UI that you like. I wish organisations like the EFF and FSF would spend a bit more of their marketing budget educating the general public on this. If there's only one implementation, particularly if it's closed source, then you're at the whims of whoever is responsible for it.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Snap was fully aware that this backlash would come. Many people are going to fight any change. They had announced the coming change and warned investors that existing users would complain but it is something they feel they need to do to continue to grow.
Unless this hits revenue too much either by lack of user base growth or reduced ad income the change won't be fully reversed.
How are the UX guys supposed to justify their jobs if they can't fuck up the interface every couple of weeks?
The Microsoft Office ribbon still sucks.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Currently deployed, so my phone wont adopt the new version. I really wonder how bad this can be if so many people hate it. I'm still running the old version and getting updates regularly to it.
I resubbed to Hulu again on my Roku a while back and their new UI is almost unusable. Do the people that approve these new UI's even use their own services? There is no way that they do, or they would know they're taking a huge step backwards.
Let's start with the basics, kids: An upgrade should offer an *improvement* in the user experience. Otherwise it's a downgrade.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Kind of but with lower quality. It is more like sending negatives taken with a Holga through the mail.
Time to offend someone
people always hate change right? even if it's positive... well not this time. the update actually isn't intuitive.
the original goal was to make paid content separate from your friend's content, however they actually made it worse. If you go to the discover tab, you get one screen where both types are mixed together. If you tap on a friend's snap, it will switch next to a paid content's snaps.
If you to to the chat tab, you do get only your friend's contents, but the sorting is erratic. if you have lots of contacts they will get buried down below if they don't post much
Open Source Java Web Forum with LDAP authentication
1 million 14 yr old girls don't like change.
Sent from my TARDIS
Oooh, communicating in metaphor like this might rise to "Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra". Count me in.
When you have a single implementation of a protocol, some people are always going to hate it. When you have an open protocol with multiple client implementations, you can choose the UI that you like
And then you get flame wars about which UI is best and added costs to handle them all plus a lot of reinventing the figurative wheel. There are drawbacks no matter what approach you use. I think in general I agree with you that the open protocol approach is better for most circumstances. Unfortunately it's not necessarily better for specific parties. For a circumstance like this I doubt Snapchat finds much profit in the protocol approach. Their house, their rules I guess.
If there's only one implementation, particularly if it's closed source, then you're at the whims of whoever is responsible for it.
Very true but in fairness not always a bad thing. (just usually) Having a single implementation can make things a lot simpler, less costly, and require less training. Whether or not that is a good thing in a particular circumstance is an exercise for the reader.
Dear insufferably-stupid fuckwits whose obviously-stupid choices create the network effects that retard all progress and make everything worse for everyone,
You all chose your app before your protocol. If you had chosen an open documented protocol and then chosen from the competing (and interoperable) implementations of that protocol, then you would have the UI that you want. You would be using an app that would be designed to serve you instead of whoever wrote it. You would not be locked in. You would be a hostage to no one. You would have everything you want, and your computer would be your tool, exclusively.
But you chose to SUCK. You chose lameness and suffering.
So go fuck yourselves. Fuck yourself hard, right up the ass, without lube, and as brutally as you would wish on your most despised enemy to which you would never even allow the slightest amount of dignity or even admit personhood. And keep fucking yourselves until you learn this incredible simple, obvious, easy lesson that anyone who reflects for a few minutes has always been able to learn.
Yours Truly, Cajun Hell
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
As long as their customers are not complaining, why would they change? This is like cows complaing that the farmer has cold hands.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
How much thought does a person really put into responding on snapchat? Petitions on electronic media just don't have the same resonance, because you're likely to think about what you're signing a lot more if it is a real piece of paper.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
Yes, it was. It was more organized and logical and took up less real estate. Change to improve something is good. Change for the sake of change and newness isn't.
Snapchat's entire premise is that images will vanish after a few seconds but that's not true anymore. It had other social things bolted onto that framework later and they always felt bolted on and crappy. Snapchat's app has always been a pain in the ass to use and every iteration made it worse than the last. I made the mistake of reinstalling the app briefly a couple of days ago and I couldn't believe how hard to use it had become. It may be the least intuitive and discoverable UI ever designed in the history of modern GUI-based computing. I wouldn't cry if they went bankrupt and vanished into fat air.
The menus were predictable. That's the least to be expected.
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
There is no turning back.
Face it. WE ARE SNAPCHAT, and this is the future.
For those of you 14-year olds that want the old snapchat back, we will re-issue it, using the prior protocols, but we will not be using the snapchat name. Henceforth, if you wish to retain the old UI and previous functionality, simply install Snappy McSnapface and everything old is new again. Happy Snapping, says Snappy McSnapface.
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
Social apps want to grow in users all the time and they keep changing their product all the time to get more users, get them to spend more time or add more monetization options.
The problem is that at some point your product is gonna be pretty good and adding more things usually makes it worse. The undelying problem is that the users are not the customers they're just the product and so what they want is a secondary concern.