

How Path Gets Clicks and Why Foursquare Flops - jason_shah
http://blog.jasonshah.org/post/18441800859/how-path-gets-clicks-and-why-foursquare-flops-ux-for

======
revorad
There might be a simpler reason: most Foursquare links are not photos, just
check-ins, which by themselves are no fun.

The real dilemma is this: if Path A/B tested their current design against one
similar to that of Foursquare, and the Foursquare design had better
conversions, then which one should they choose?

~~~
jason_shah
Fair point. Photos definitely are (IMHO) more engaging than plaintext or even
Google Maps of where someone is. But this post compared photo posts on either
platform, so to be fair, the medium was the same -- but you're still right in
that Foursquare doesn't have as much of a focus on photos as Path does.

Really interesting counter-question you posed. It appears to then be a
decision about Path's conviction to how things SHOULD be designed vs.
immediate conversion lifts (and how significant those lifts were/what future
engagement was like/other conversion and engagement metrics).

For example, I imagine Facebook has tested designs that increased user
engagement but didn't fit with a bigger picture strategy or violated some core
tenets. They probably scrapped it and stuck to their conviction in a lot of
cases when there were alluring potential upticks in conversions with alternate
designs.

~~~
ctide
It doesn't matter that Foursquare added photos later, people have been seeing
boring foursquare links on Twitter / Facebook for years now. I don't even
notice the [pic] tag because I've been trained to mentally filter out those
links because they're boring.

Path is inherently about the photo first, I'm never clicking through to Path
to figure out where the person is, only to look at the photo.

~~~
jason_shah
This underscores how important it is for companies to get as close to right
early on, no matter how MVP.

Arguably if 4sq. started including photos sooner, or had a less boring UX on
those UGC landing pages in the first place even if they lacked photos for a
while, they could have counteracted this sort of apathy towards their links
and avoided, or altered, the mental filter you mentioned.

~~~
ctide
Yes, without a doubt. Look at how few people use their lists feature. It was
months before I even realized it existed, and I check in constantly. People
have a very clear picture of what Foursquare is and what it provides, and that
makes it incredibly difficult for them to break out of that mold.

------
andrewjshults
One place Path definitely falls flat on the click through links parts is in
emails they send out. If I'm not on a mobile device the "Someone wants to
share their path with you" links are frustrating since they just lead to a
download the app page. I have a number of friends that are in my queue on Path
simply because I generally handle emails from my computer rather than my
phone, so they're pretty much guaranteed to languish underneath a pile of
other social media notifications.

In contrast, for as long as I can remember foursquare has had a way to accept
friend requests from the web, even when the overall web experience was
minimal. I know that Path wants to drive people to the mobile app, but the
best way for me to want to use the app is to make getting friends into it as
seamless as possible. Right now, it always seems like a two step process of
seeing the email and then remembering to actually accept the friend request
(yes, the notifications are theoretically turned on, but they rarely seem to
come through properly for Path on Android).

~~~
cwilson
I'm pretty positive they are working on the various elements of the web
experience you've mentioned, while still focusing on driving people to the
app. During the Path 2.0 launch, the website was pushed to a lower priority,
but they will get there.

That said, am I alone in basically turning all email notifications off these
days? I filter out, or turn off, emails from Facebook, Twitter, and Path (my
primary networks). I'm using those networks often enough to not miss anything
important, and you can generally have anything urgent sent as a push
notification (direct messages, being mentioned in a post, etc).

------
casemorton
I think the main difference is just that Path only lets you follow such a
small number of people. Thus you are immediately saying these people are
credible to you & whatever links they share are most likely worth looking
into. Versus Foursquare where each link posted is just another drop in the hat
for people how have hundreds or thousands of people they follow.

~~~
jason_shah
That IS a difference, but I don't follow anyone on Path (yet). The Path links
I consume are via Twitter, as were the Foursquare ones, so arguably the
credibility and selection bias are equalized.

Since the links I consume have been shared on Twitter (by people who don't
follow me, and whom I don't follow) people are breaking out of the Path
limitations by automatically, simultaneously publishing their updates to
Twitter as they're being posted on Path. Effectively people have subverted the
'private' differentiation the Path offers in a lot of use cases from what I am
seeing.

------
parvinsingh
This is a great comparison on UX for any app or start-up. What i really want
to show the user when he lands up on a page, and what next. This is like the
Coca-cola add, where they dont sell the brand, but show a soda bottle with
Coca-Cola (in small) for a short duration. Engage the user in what you want,
no need to sell the brand-name. He will praise you more if he likes your work
:).

------
jason_shah
I have noticed a personal trend that I click all the time on links shared via
Path for all sorts of people (friends and people I have never met).

But I don't do the same for Foursquare. For what other apps do people click
through when links are shared on Twitter and Facebook?

~~~
casemorton
Yeah Facebook & Twitter for sure, also Tumblr. But the people you're clicking
on Path are in your group right? You can't just see anyone, or am I wrong?

~~~
evanwalsh
I don't have any people in my group and I've been able to look at others'
links.

~~~
Aloisius
Only the person who posted the photo can share it (and as far as I can tell,
only at the time they post). As I understand it, by sharing it they are
basically giving access to anyone who has the URL.

------
mountaineer
I can't remember the last time I saw a Path link in my Twitter stream, but I
see a few 4sq ones a day.

