<story><title>Twitter for Mac is incapable of accepting certain letters in the password field</title><url>https://twitter.com/MikeBeas/status/1189416778104999937</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>iamaelephant</author><text>Are you implying that Netflix software quality is good? As someone who uses the web interface in a variety of browsers, I disagree in the strongest terms possible.</text></item><item><author>jedberg</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve thought a lot about this, having worked at some of these companies with both good and bad quality.  The best conclusion I can come to is whether or not the executives use the technology on a regular basis.&lt;p&gt;At eBay, the execs didn&amp;#x27;t use the platform much.  In fact, when I worked there, they had to give us a $10 credit just to get us to use it (and then stopped when the users said it wasn&amp;#x27;t fair that employees were bidding with someone else&amp;#x27;s money).&lt;p&gt;At Facebook&amp;#x2F;IG, the execs use the platform often.  At Netflix the execs use it pretty much every day.  At Twitter, you don&amp;#x27;t see a lot of executive use.&lt;p&gt;You can even see it at Apple.  The quality on MacOs has been falling, quite possibly because all the execs are using iPads and iPhones as their daily drivers, and rarely using laptops.&lt;p&gt;I think in the end it boils down to visibility to people who can affect change.  Either your execs need to use the product often, or the engineers need to be empowered to make changes without exec approval (or both, like at Netflix or Facebook&amp;#x2F;IG).</text></item><item><author>TicklishTiger</author><text>I am a fan of Twitter. It is a much better social network then Facebook and Instagram. But when it comes to development quality, Twitter reminds me of Ebay. The technology just does not seem solid. Every other month, something goes wrong.&lt;p&gt;I wonder if there is a systematic difference between companies with solid development and companies with wonky development. Is there a different hiring philosophy in place? A different type of tech stack? A different management structure?&lt;p&gt;Just a week ago, Twitter lost over 20% market cap because they noticed that they were showing people device-personalized ads even though they were opted out of that. After they fixed it, revenues went down.&lt;p&gt;In other words, a stunning 10 billion dollar of Twitters market cap was based on the illusion that the tech was working as expected. While in reality it was wrecking havoc.&lt;p&gt;Is it really possible that a feature that makes up a quarter of the companies value is not being tested?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jedberg</author><text>I think you may have inadvertently proved my point. The web interface is one of the least used interfaces. It probably doesn’t get used by many execs or engineers in the company.</text></comment>
<story><title>Twitter for Mac is incapable of accepting certain letters in the password field</title><url>https://twitter.com/MikeBeas/status/1189416778104999937</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>iamaelephant</author><text>Are you implying that Netflix software quality is good? As someone who uses the web interface in a variety of browsers, I disagree in the strongest terms possible.</text></item><item><author>jedberg</author><text>I&amp;#x27;ve thought a lot about this, having worked at some of these companies with both good and bad quality.  The best conclusion I can come to is whether or not the executives use the technology on a regular basis.&lt;p&gt;At eBay, the execs didn&amp;#x27;t use the platform much.  In fact, when I worked there, they had to give us a $10 credit just to get us to use it (and then stopped when the users said it wasn&amp;#x27;t fair that employees were bidding with someone else&amp;#x27;s money).&lt;p&gt;At Facebook&amp;#x2F;IG, the execs use the platform often.  At Netflix the execs use it pretty much every day.  At Twitter, you don&amp;#x27;t see a lot of executive use.&lt;p&gt;You can even see it at Apple.  The quality on MacOs has been falling, quite possibly because all the execs are using iPads and iPhones as their daily drivers, and rarely using laptops.&lt;p&gt;I think in the end it boils down to visibility to people who can affect change.  Either your execs need to use the product often, or the engineers need to be empowered to make changes without exec approval (or both, like at Netflix or Facebook&amp;#x2F;IG).</text></item><item><author>TicklishTiger</author><text>I am a fan of Twitter. It is a much better social network then Facebook and Instagram. But when it comes to development quality, Twitter reminds me of Ebay. The technology just does not seem solid. Every other month, something goes wrong.&lt;p&gt;I wonder if there is a systematic difference between companies with solid development and companies with wonky development. Is there a different hiring philosophy in place? A different type of tech stack? A different management structure?&lt;p&gt;Just a week ago, Twitter lost over 20% market cap because they noticed that they were showing people device-personalized ads even though they were opted out of that. After they fixed it, revenues went down.&lt;p&gt;In other words, a stunning 10 billion dollar of Twitters market cap was based on the illusion that the tech was working as expected. While in reality it was wrecking havoc.&lt;p&gt;Is it really possible that a feature that makes up a quarter of the companies value is not being tested?</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>jorvi</author><text>The technical quality of it is good, its just that they make shitty UX decisions like autoplaying stuff when you just want to browse their catalog.</text></comment>