[azeemba]

The author is suggesting that websites care more about server side issues than client side issues. To the point that they don't realize that users stop using them.

I think that statement is way too strong and obviously not true of businesses. It might be true if hobbyist websites where the creator is personally more interested on the server side but it's definitely not true of professional websites.

Professional websites that have enough of a budget to care about the server side will absolutely care about the client side and will track usage. If 10% fewer people used the website, the analytics would show that and there would be a fire drill.

What I can agree with on the author is more of a nuanced point. Client side problems are a lot harder and have a very long tail due to unique client configurations (OS, browser, extensions, physical hardware). So with thousands of combinations, you end up with some wild and rare issues. It becomes hard to chase all of them down and some you just have to ignore.

This can lead to it feeling like websites don't care about client side but it just shows client side is hard.

[carlosjobim]

> I think that statement is way too strong and obviously not true of businesses

Amazon.com Inc is currently worth 2.4 billion dollars and the only reason is that most businesses insist on giving their customers the worst online experience possible. I wish that I could one day understand the logic, which goes like this:

1. Notice that people are on their phones all the time.

2. And notice that when people are looking to buy something they first go on the computer or on the smart phone.

3. Therefore let's make the most godawful experience on our website possible, to make sure that our potential customers hate us and don't make a purchase.

4. Customers make their purchase on Amazon instead.

5. Profit??

[danaris]

> Amazon.com Inc is currently worth 2.4 billion dollars and the only reason is that most businesses insist on giving their customers the worst online experience possible.

This is an incredibly reductive view of how Amazon came to dominate online retail. If you genuinely believe this, I would strongly urge you to research their history and understand how they became the monopoly they are today.

I assure you, it's not primarily because they care more about the end user's experience.

[Wowfunhappy]

> most businesses insist on giving their customers the worst online experience possible.

I think you're underselling the amount of work it takes to create an experience as smooth as Amazon's.

[SoftTalker]

Amazon is fine if you want cheap chinese garbage products or name brands that have a decent chance of being counterfeit. I never buy there.

[jerbearito]

> Amazon.com Inc is currently worth 2.4 billion dollars and the only reason is that most businesses insist on giving their customers the worst online experience possible

Huh?

[transcriptase]

Trillion.