Is there a more poorly designed website than Twitter?

Pre-College Topics High School Life
1

<p>It infuriates me how miserably inefficient Twitter's design is. It's so un-crisp. Stuff takes forever to load when you click on it-FOREVER-, half the time your clicks don't even register, the pictures don't load about 65% of the time (and it takes a good 8-9 seconds per picture when it is loading 'right'), it's beyond clunky when searching for people (really, no way to search for specific people when looking at someone's followers list or whatever? I'm supposed to go down the list that has to load new names after every 6th person in alphabetical order?), it just...absolutely sucks. I can't imagine a website that is that big and that poorly engineered. </p>

<p>I mean, Facebook has its technical issues with awkward loading and popups when you click stuff, but at least you can mostly do what you want to get done on there. Twitter HAD to have been explicitly designed to have a poor user interface as a social experiment or something. No way that the designers of one of the world's biggest platforms are that comically bad at their jobs.</p>

2

<p>Two things: </p>

<ol>
<li><p>I’d recommend that you get off Internet Explorer/whatever crap internet connection you must be paying for, because Twitter’s implementation of Ruby on Rails + Java makes for a much faster website than the aging PHP architecture Facebook employs. If you’re experiencing sluggishness from Twitter, the previously mentioned factors are probably to blame.</p></li>
<li><p>It astounds me that you can’t wrap your head around Twitter’s UI yet claim that Facebook’s UI (a hallmark example of careless UI implementation in design/CS circles) is superior.</p></li>
</ol>

3

<p>Check out yale.edu. There’s your answer! (That website <em>really</em> needs an update.)</p>

<p>More seriously, as Gram clearly articulated, if you think Twitter is poorly designed, you’re probably doing it wrong.</p>

4

<p>Gram said it. It’s not Twitter, it’s you.</p>

5

<p>Actually when we were in fifth grade me and two of my friends made a website. I guarantee it was worse.</p>

6

<p>One of my teachers has a horribly laid-out website.</p>

7

<p>Who actually uses Twitter? I’ve never gotten the appeal…But then again, I only ever used Facebook for games…</p>

8

<p>I don’t have either, Serenity. Several people at my school use both, however.</p>

9

<p>Im on facebook all the time but twitter…just no.</p>

10

<p>I<code>ve got both, but am not even really ever on Twitter. I think I</code>ve got like maybe 5 tweets…and then I gave up. Kind of dumb. Facebook is better, though 99% at my school would disagree with that.</p>

11

<p>The Penn admissions website is pretty much crap.</p>

12

<p>try reddit</p>

<p>how do people even use that?</p>

13

<p>MySpace is probably worse – which is partly why it declined so rapidly. I never used MySpace though…</p>

14

<p>I like the Yale website! Try [Iowa</a> Young Writers’ Studio](<a href=“Iowa Young Writers' Studio | The University of Iowa”>http://www.uiowa.edu/~iyws/) - definitely much smaller, but for a prestigious program, it could be cleaned up. At the same time, I’m sort of fond of the retro homeyness.</p>

15

<p>MODERATOR’S NOTE</p>

<p>subreddit addresses count as social media links and are not allowed on CC.</p>

16

<p>Gram remember this one? [No</a> title](<a href=“http://www.masonicbowl.org/]No”>http://www.masonicbowl.org/)</p>

17

<p>;_;</p>

<p>I shudder every time I see the Masonic Bowl’s website. That right there is a shining example of why it’s wrong for a prestigious event to have such a poor website.</p>

18

<p>Oh wow. You two win.</p>

19

<p>

</li>
</ol>

<p>Holy crap. That’s a lot of professional-sounding tech jargon. Do you code or something?</p>

20

<p>Hah, I wish I could code. I just took a liking to the tech world at a young age and learned a lot about the industry as time went on.</p>