Factors of popularity of userscripts on the example of one site
Let's talk about the script highlighting the comment of the author of the article in the topic, which at one time was extremely popular, judging by the number of downloads since 2008 on the site userscripts.org (4433 at the time of writing this review). The function is simple, but it's amazing how she could get several times more downloads than other scripts, with other functions. Let's look at the factors that could gain popularity of this script and not contribute to the popularity of others.
The idea of ​​the script is simple and is suggested by 2 functions implemented on Habré: highlighting the headings of your own comments and highlighting new comments. To these 2 types of backlighting, the author’s article’s backlight is added (or, one might say, a topstarter, if the article is treated as the beginning of a discussion topic like a forum). We need to interfere with this new color with the case of a new topic, so we’ll get the need to highlight the title with 2 new colors: just the author’s headlines and the author’s new headings. And that's all that this script does. Its code takes 17 lines of not very dense recording, that is, it is very simple. He was supported by the author for almost 4 years. Probably, support in recent months has ceased, so another author, Inversion , was forced to clone it , so that it would work again on modern Habré. By the way, his clone, without announcements, scored 126 installations in less than a month - the usual installation speed of the old script (about 110 per month), which roughly corresponds to the number of people interested in scripts for Habr in general.
Installing the script is an approximate statistic, because the user can simply copy the text of the script and install it manually, then the installation will not be counted. It can be installed by pressing a button in 2 browsers - 2 settings will be counted. And tomorrow it will reinstall the system and install it again - you’ll get 4 installations. And if you read the site from your work computer and want to have the same comfort, then the counter will work there. Therefore, the actual number of script users is not the number of script installations. Therefore, we are not talking about users, but about installations. The number of real users may be several times less, and maybe even 20 times less than the number of downloads over the long term.
Nevertheless, we will be interested in the relationship of the number of downloads as a reflection of the relevance and popularity of the script to its user qualities, in order to derive some rules that the script could follow if the author wishes to maintain his popularity. (Popularity is conditional, because we are talking about several dozens of people using the script at the same time, let the number of thousands of installations not confuse anyone.)
')
Using the example of this most popular script for Habr (the entire list can be seen by doing a search by site name and search by tags) we will try to identify signs of popularity.
1) the script is quite well searched for the site. The script in question has the tags: “habr habrahabr habrahabr.ru habr habrhabr”. Normally, almost nothing is superfluous, and all possible search attempts are covered. (The exception - “habrahabr.ru” on the site is perceived without a point and therefore is practically useless.) Among tens of thousands of scripts, this is a good opportunity to meet the eye of the seeker. Interestingly, the absence of these words in the text does not exclude the search for a script. That is, tags are included in the general search, too, this is a feature of the site.
2) a clear description. The script has a few words in the description, but in English. They describe the essence of the script.
3) the need for a script. Probably, many people found the highlighting of the author of the article useful, otherwise how to explain popularity.
4) clarity of the code. Probably, 17 lines of the script cause the user to trust and create a wow effect: “Wow, such a simple script and so useful!”.
5) Laconic description. Additional Russian description - only 2 lines. However, they fully describe the action of the script. There is no screenshot, so the user does not know what he will receive. Strange that it does not stop - probably, the effect of simplicity of the code compensates for this?
6) Utility for unauthorized users. The script does not make a difference in the result for logging in without authorization.
7) positive feedback with own popularity. Probably, against the background of the download indicators of other scripts, this one always looked good. For example, now in the search list of pieces of 50 scripts - about 10-15 noteworthy and non-aging. And only a few - with hundreds of installations. Probably, in the sum with simplicity, the presence of hundreds of installations is a very good hint for interest in it.
8) support for new versions of the site code. As soon as the “autumn update of 2010” occurred, the author corrected the script.
9) cross-browser compatibility. According to the statistics of this script for 3.5 years it is difficult to draw conclusions for the present. In those years, there was one main browser supporting user scripts, and a number of others equaling to it. Now - they all support user scripts evenly, and Chrome is even more successful. All the more strange is the lack of support for this script in Chrome. As prompted by Inversion, it is supported via TamperMonkey. 3 years ago it really was a normal way of support, because there was no other. Now it is better, in my opinion, to strive for native support in Chrome. As shown by a survey of users of one of my script ( results ), the distribution of users is fairly even and corresponds to the prevalence of browsers. By the way, take part in the survey on the first link, if you used this script. You can not assume that userscript is only for Firefox.
10) I will add another factor arising from other observations. The script without the announcement on Habré, as an alternative to Inversion, highlighting the author of the topic, or my script on another topic , shows a stream of installations at about 120 per month. If the script is announced by the article and if it is useful, of course, then the number of downloads will be 250-300 if the article is viewed on the main page, and even if the script requires authorization, as the example with the “All-Favorites” switch hub script showed. Then the flow of installations will also be at the level of 120 per month. Of course, this conclusion will work for other sites, but with varying degrees of popularity, in proportion to attendance, readability of the announcement and other factors discussed above.
I will add an article with a photo of the screen with highlighted headings of the author's comments on the topic with a script from Inversion, so that it can be seen which script is being discussed. Pinkish-orange stripes are the very “highlights” of the article’s author’s comments. Fuchsia is also highlighted by the author - this is done by another script highlighting the author’s comments, and comments are squeezed to the height of the ZenComment userspace .
PS : why there is no blog about userscripts, but there is a blog about Greasemonkey, which has long been non-mainstream and even gives way to its clone Scriptish? When will this injustice be corrected?
UPD 22:00: Added option to highlight the author of the topic in the HabrAjax script version 0.834, similar to the “Topic Author Highlighter” script, but with colors 2 times paler and with support in Chrome (without TamperMonkey). The combination with the existing lighting in the form of fuchsia gives these 4 combinations of colors. Take here:
userscripts.org/scripts/show/121690 .
The default option is the 4th pattern - the most soothing colors, and, at the same time, a noticeable selection.
This highlight is still reflected in the list of comments:
The idea of ​​the script is simple and is suggested by 2 functions implemented on Habré: highlighting the headings of your own comments and highlighting new comments. To these 2 types of backlighting, the author’s article’s backlight is added (or, one might say, a topstarter, if the article is treated as the beginning of a discussion topic like a forum). We need to interfere with this new color with the case of a new topic, so we’ll get the need to highlight the title with 2 new colors: just the author’s headlines and the author’s new headings. And that's all that this script does. Its code takes 17 lines of not very dense recording, that is, it is very simple. He was supported by the author for almost 4 years. Probably, support in recent months has ceased, so another author, Inversion , was forced to clone it , so that it would work again on modern Habré. By the way, his clone, without announcements, scored 126 installations in less than a month - the usual installation speed of the old script (about 110 per month), which roughly corresponds to the number of people interested in scripts for Habr in general.
Installing the script is an approximate statistic, because the user can simply copy the text of the script and install it manually, then the installation will not be counted. It can be installed by pressing a button in 2 browsers - 2 settings will be counted. And tomorrow it will reinstall the system and install it again - you’ll get 4 installations. And if you read the site from your work computer and want to have the same comfort, then the counter will work there. Therefore, the actual number of script users is not the number of script installations. Therefore, we are not talking about users, but about installations. The number of real users may be several times less, and maybe even 20 times less than the number of downloads over the long term.
Nevertheless, we will be interested in the relationship of the number of downloads as a reflection of the relevance and popularity of the script to its user qualities, in order to derive some rules that the script could follow if the author wishes to maintain his popularity. (Popularity is conditional, because we are talking about several dozens of people using the script at the same time, let the number of thousands of installations not confuse anyone.)
')
Using the example of this most popular script for Habr (the entire list can be seen by doing a search by site name and search by tags) we will try to identify signs of popularity.
1) the script is quite well searched for the site. The script in question has the tags: “habr habrahabr habrahabr.ru habr habrhabr”. Normally, almost nothing is superfluous, and all possible search attempts are covered. (The exception - “habrahabr.ru” on the site is perceived without a point and therefore is practically useless.) Among tens of thousands of scripts, this is a good opportunity to meet the eye of the seeker. Interestingly, the absence of these words in the text does not exclude the search for a script. That is, tags are included in the general search, too, this is a feature of the site.
2) a clear description. The script has a few words in the description, but in English. They describe the essence of the script.
3) the need for a script. Probably, many people found the highlighting of the author of the article useful, otherwise how to explain popularity.
4) clarity of the code. Probably, 17 lines of the script cause the user to trust and create a wow effect: “Wow, such a simple script and so useful!”.
5) Laconic description. Additional Russian description - only 2 lines. However, they fully describe the action of the script. There is no screenshot, so the user does not know what he will receive. Strange that it does not stop - probably, the effect of simplicity of the code compensates for this?
6) Utility for unauthorized users. The script does not make a difference in the result for logging in without authorization.
7) positive feedback with own popularity. Probably, against the background of the download indicators of other scripts, this one always looked good. For example, now in the search list of pieces of 50 scripts - about 10-15 noteworthy and non-aging. And only a few - with hundreds of installations. Probably, in the sum with simplicity, the presence of hundreds of installations is a very good hint for interest in it.
8) support for new versions of the site code. As soon as the “autumn update of 2010” occurred, the author corrected the script.
9) cross-browser compatibility. According to the statistics of this script for 3.5 years it is difficult to draw conclusions for the present. In those years, there was one main browser supporting user scripts, and a number of others equaling to it. Now - they all support user scripts evenly, and Chrome is even more successful. All the more strange is the lack of support for this script in Chrome. As prompted by Inversion, it is supported via TamperMonkey. 3 years ago it really was a normal way of support, because there was no other. Now it is better, in my opinion, to strive for native support in Chrome. As shown by a survey of users of one of my script ( results ), the distribution of users is fairly even and corresponds to the prevalence of browsers. By the way, take part in the survey on the first link, if you used this script. You can not assume that userscript is only for Firefox.
10) I will add another factor arising from other observations. The script without the announcement on Habré, as an alternative to Inversion, highlighting the author of the topic, or my script on another topic , shows a stream of installations at about 120 per month. If the script is announced by the article and if it is useful, of course, then the number of downloads will be 250-300 if the article is viewed on the main page, and even if the script requires authorization, as the example with the “All-Favorites” switch hub script showed. Then the flow of installations will also be at the level of 120 per month. Of course, this conclusion will work for other sites, but with varying degrees of popularity, in proportion to attendance, readability of the announcement and other factors discussed above.
I will add an article with a photo of the screen with highlighted headings of the author's comments on the topic with a script from Inversion, so that it can be seen which script is being discussed. Pinkish-orange stripes are the very “highlights” of the article’s author’s comments. Fuchsia is also highlighted by the author - this is done by another script highlighting the author’s comments, and comments are squeezed to the height of the ZenComment userspace .
PS : why there is no blog about userscripts, but there is a blog about Greasemonkey, which has long been non-mainstream and even gives way to its clone Scriptish? When will this injustice be corrected?
UPD 22:00: Added option to highlight the author of the topic in the HabrAjax script version 0.834, similar to the “Topic Author Highlighter” script, but with colors 2 times paler and with support in Chrome (without TamperMonkey). The combination with the existing lighting in the form of fuchsia gives these 4 combinations of colors. Take here:
userscripts.org/scripts/show/121690 .
The default option is the 4th pattern - the most soothing colors, and, at the same time, a noticeable selection.
This highlight is still reflected in the list of comments:
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/142103/
All Articles