<rant>
Each time a new version of iTunes comes out; people line up to complain about the UI. There's something about change that people fear and don't like.
Now that I've spent a bit more time with the "New Digg" - let me say it isn't that bad. You can still submit links. That erases most of the arguments that I had against it. The crux of Digg is finding new stuff.
For the auto-submission? I think it's a good thing. Normally - if I wanted to submit something I wrote, I'd log into Digg, submit it, and see it remain ranked with 1 Digg (mine). Now, what I do gets auto-submitted, and automatically gets a single Digg (mine, again).
For the enhanced algorithm? Using multiple sources, but weighing the number of Diggs as having more of an effect. Good idea, actually. Ok, sit back and let's see how this works out: you want to find new stuff. Stuff that a lot of people like. Do you want a closed community of Diggers or a bigger community of people who may in the future be lured to Digg? At the end of the day - I don't think this will make much of a difference.
For those quoting http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/digg.com, let me say that is a considerable dip (in the month of August 2010, pageviews and time on site have nearly halved!). Is this the end of the world? Let's dig deeper. Page views probably went down since articles don't seem change as often. Can't complain there. That would also describe why the time on the site went down. And would explain why the reach has remained somewhat constant. I call the evidence inconclusive that Digg shed most of it's users.
Lastly, for those complaining about not seeing how many Diggs a comment, just click your profile icon.
Yes, Digg did shed some users - there are the emotional bunch that have trouble whenever the iTunes UI changes...
Here's the only downside. I lost my entire history. Either it's in the process of being ported, or lost forever. From reading the comments on Digg, I see things are probably being tweaked.
Like any new machine; Digg will take some time. Play around with it, and you might even find that going forward it's going to be much better. It looks more like a problem with deployment rather than a problem with the system. If they slowly deployed it to certain users rather than the whole - things might have gone more smoothly. A bit more communication, and maybe Reddit wouldn't have flooded the front page (if deployment of the new version took considerable time and people were complaining about real issues at the time - notifying the users might have been better).
But all in all. It's not that bad. And to say this, I forced myself to spend a bit of time to use it (rather than my previous version of this post that was completely inaccurate - a bit of research goes a long way - although let's say I still did no research for the fun of it!)...
Edit1: Mashable has a nicely researched piece at http://mashable.com/2010/09/15/what-digg-must-do-to-survive/
</rant>
For the auto-submission? I think it's a good thing. Normally - if I wanted to submit something I wrote, I'd log into Digg, submit it, and see it remain ranked with 1 Digg (mine). Now, what I do gets auto-submitted, and automatically gets a single Digg (mine, again).
For the enhanced algorithm? Using multiple sources, but weighing the number of Diggs as having more of an effect. Good idea, actually. Ok, sit back and let's see how this works out: you want to find new stuff. Stuff that a lot of people like. Do you want a closed community of Diggers or a bigger community of people who may in the future be lured to Digg? At the end of the day - I don't think this will make much of a difference.
For those quoting http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/digg.com, let me say that is a considerable dip (in the month of August 2010, pageviews and time on site have nearly halved!). Is this the end of the world? Let's dig deeper. Page views probably went down since articles don't seem change as often. Can't complain there. That would also describe why the time on the site went down. And would explain why the reach has remained somewhat constant. I call the evidence inconclusive that Digg shed most of it's users.
Lastly, for those complaining about not seeing how many Diggs a comment, just click your profile icon.
Yes, Digg did shed some users - there are the emotional bunch that have trouble whenever the iTunes UI changes...
Here's the only downside. I lost my entire history. Either it's in the process of being ported, or lost forever. From reading the comments on Digg, I see things are probably being tweaked.
Like any new machine; Digg will take some time. Play around with it, and you might even find that going forward it's going to be much better. It looks more like a problem with deployment rather than a problem with the system. If they slowly deployed it to certain users rather than the whole - things might have gone more smoothly. A bit more communication, and maybe Reddit wouldn't have flooded the front page (if deployment of the new version took considerable time and people were complaining about real issues at the time - notifying the users might have been better).
But all in all. It's not that bad. And to say this, I forced myself to spend a bit of time to use it (rather than my previous version of this post that was completely inaccurate - a bit of research goes a long way - although let's say I still did no research for the fun of it!)...
Edit1: Mashable has a nicely researched piece at http://mashable.com/2010/09/15/what-digg-must-do-to-survive/
</rant>
No comments:
Post a Comment