Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

13

If the user "likes" your web site (or even better, one of the articles on your web site), this is a one time action. As an effect, the user will post an "I like this page/article" on their wall and all their friends (or whatever publicity they choose) will see that post in their Facebook timeline. Then it will vanish into eternity... You will have no ...


9

Interesting question, so I've gone digging for some research on this. This study indicates that more than one sharing button does improve CTR when included in EMail messages (although it is referring to a single specific sharing button (i.e. Twitter) rather than a generic 'Share This' button). A lot of my initial searching seems to point to this one ...


9

I think Vitaly Mijritsky sums up some downsides quite clearly. The way it is currently set up it is not clear what the link link does and clicking on it doesn't provide any feedback at all. But even more: the popup doesn't indicate it is not standard behavior. It may be different it said something like "copy this link to earn [etc]" without putting the link ...


8

Facebook says the Share Button is deprecated and will not be supported anymore at some point in the future. Reason is that clickthrough rates of the Like Button are better. We deprecated the Share Button when we launched the Like button, because the Like button improves clickthrough rates by allowing users to connect with one click, and by allowing them ...


7

Well, you're kind of glossing over the other way to share directly on the question, too: There is also a dynamic share that appears below answers if they are of sufficient length, 50% of the time, with that percentage declining as your reputation increases. The UI you're referring to is largely for users who know how to copy and paste a link. The above ...


7

You Should Have a Public Marketing Site Typically in a web application the actual "application" part is behind an authentication wall which is not accessible to the public (and not easy to share with regular social networking share-buttons), but there is also, most likely, a public "marketing" side of the web application which is for most intents and ...


7

If available, you should prefer the share action provider shown in the second example. It was added in Android 4.0 (API 14) as part of the Action Bar, and it's been backported to Android 2.1 (API 7) as part of the support library. This method is quicker and easier for users. The share button can remain on the screen at all times, and the most recently used ...


6

OK - so I'm going to play a slight joker card here. And you may not realize it but you're giving this answer away in the question. I'm totally agreeing with @PhilipW and @Baa along the lines of just Upload - but with a simple twist which speaks volumes... Upload with an ellipis - which tells the user that there is something in the user interface which is ...


6

I've conducted a study about this on a blog. The blog contains short posts and images of various objects. I've started out by placing the share buttons at the bottom of the blog post. Then I placed the buttons both under the headline and at the bottom of the post. When I did that I've doubled the clicks. I've also studied another web site where the share ...


6

The most effective placement of social sharing buttons is the place, at which visitors make the decision to share and where it's the most prominent. Naturally users will decide to share once they're done consuming the content. This means that the social sharing buttons should be located somewhere close to the bottom. However, content footers often contain a ...


6

Yes, you should still provide social sharing options Here are some of the reason why: When using a share button on a site, you may not be sharing the same URL that the site appears to have. For example, if I select 'share' on this page, the URL that I get to share is: http://ux.stackexchange.com/q/38299/4595 (which includes my userID of 4595). But if I ...


5

As long as people can find your buttons fast, then I would say you have placed your Social Media buttons in a good place. As for if a technique works well, the only way to know for certain would be to measure using actual stats over a quantifiable amount of time. I'd hazard a guess and say they (money.cnn.com) get more through doing this way that simply ...


5

At the end of the article it is a must! And to even more encourage sharing you can place the same share buttons somewhere in the beggining as well near title, near lead text -> because a lot of users do not read the whole article through and share it becuase of the great title or great lead text!


5

If people don't recognise social sharing buttons they aren't going to use them. People recognise the logos of their favourite social sharing apps, and you want them to be able to do this as easily as possible so that they are more likely to share them. If you think that your site looking good is more important than this, then why do you even need them in ...


5

I want multiple users to be able to share the same canvas Assuming we're talking about realtime collaborative editing, a list of users with access to the document (and their associated colors?) seems to me like something that you naturally would have built into your UI already. An "add collaborators" button (yap, a button, sorry) at the bottom of such ...


5

How about direct share buttons for the 2-3 most used networks, with a 'More' option bringing up a menu; I'd say the menu should include the networks with direct share buttons as well, so the user wouldn't get confused if they only spotted the menu button at the main page. Best of both worlds: lower friction for high use networks + access to lower use ...


4

E-mail is the ever-present and most used channel for 1-to-1 communications (instant messaging may be rivaling it in some cases). However, it may not be your solution as you don't know yet who is going to be the primary user of this application. Those people may have completely different workflows and/or channel preferences. Do some user research around this ...


4

I would try to avoid automatic truncation for as long as possible, by gradually abbreviating the generic elements. For instance, in your example I'd first abbreviate Stack Exchange to SE, then, if the tweet is still too long, make it Sci-Fi SE. I don't think it needs to be abbreviated always, only when the tweets are too long. When the tweet is still too ...


4

So I'll preface my response by saying that it really does depend on the rest of the layout, as far as how you have certain elements grouped or layed out, but I generally am a big fan of using the approach the CNN Money site you referenced used. I can't count how many times I've experienced frustration while hunting for a site's 'share' options, since (as ...


4

Personally, I would place: links to your social profiles on top links to share the current page at the bottom: as you mentionned, that way they can read the article and decide whether they want to share it or not Otherwise, you could mix it: display share buttons on the side of the article once the user scrolled at least past half of the article ...


4

http://sharethis.com/ have used a short catchy phrase 'Share this' and used a really good icon indicating connected but diverging nodes in a network. I'd suggest something similar. It depends if there is an intermediate stage between clicking the button and submitting the final share, but Share with, Share to, Share this are all short and to the point. Of ...


4

This is entirely dependent on your target audience. For example: A career oriented website may only need linkedin or dribbble. Different social media platforms caters to different types of audiences. It's never a good idea to slap as many social media networks for the sake of it just being there. You should also keep in mind that in most cases less is ...


3

I think it's important to consider both your audience and your content. Audience: Older and/or less tech-savvy audiences would probably want an easy way to share by email, while younger or more tech-savvy people might think twitter, facebook, or reddit are more important. Content: Online book reading would probably benefit from sharing between friends ...


3

Gowalla for Android (and Foursquare, I guess) use the following design: The key here is that the status message of the app isn't duplicated, saving that entire form you included where you separately state that you just "rambled" something - why not just share the ramble itself? Twitter and Facebook are just checkboxes (which, in fact, still take up too ...


3

How about just the one box that says share with a "mail" icon to share with friends: (no apologies for ripping off your picture!). When they select "m" they then get to choose which friends. The big drawback with this is that if the links to Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn etc. are already set up then those are one click actions while the "mail" is several. ...


3

Start by reading Facebook share for developers and use some of the standard icons/buttons available. It's much easier for a user if she recognizes the button from other applications and web pages.


3

Reading your comment above, I believe that as a reader, you should only share something that you have fully considered the value of and have concluded that it is of interest to others and worth sharing. So, putting share buttons at the top because they like it at first sight does not fall into this category, whereas those that check out the whole post and ...


3

First stop and consider why people need to flag as inappropriate; if content isn't allowed on your site, why is it allowed to be there for two weeks? If you allow content for two weeks, your site could suddenly become a porn site and without a flagging option your users have no way to share this information. Or, if you are a porn site, your site could ...


3

As with most things, it is a tradeoff. There is really no clear winner, and you must choose between which factors matter most to you. If you use existing camera functionality: - most users will have no problem understanding how things work - have less code to maintain - fewer bugs - lower development time - lower cost If you create own camera ...


3

Android is designed with the concept of having Intents done by different applications. Per Android standards, if you want to take a photo in your application, it should hand off to whatever software provides the photo taking Intent unless you specifically need to alter the behavior of taking a photo (in which case you should implement your own Intent for ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible