> a company that prioritizes their current customers and focus on keeping them satisfied instead of just focusing on fast growth.

I always hated how the "Login" button is smaller on every website than the "Sign Up" button.

▲

JoshTriplett a day ago | parent | next [-]

> I always hated how the "Login" button is smaller on every website than the "Sign Up" button.

I always assumed that was because it's the least common flow. Once you've signed up, you're logged in, so the only time you should ever need the "login" button is on a new computer, or after logging out to switch accounts, or if the service offers a "remember me" checkbox (don't do that) and doesn't check it by default (definitely don't do that), or if the user genuinely wants to not be remembered (e.g. they used private browsing).

If you're having to use "login" on any regular basis, something in the overall flow needs improving.

▲

layer8 a day ago | parent | next [-]

> the only time you should ever need the "login" button is on a new computer, or after logging out to switch accounts

That’s still more frequent per customer than signing up.

It only makes sense when prioritizing growth over your long-term customers.

▲

xboxnolifes a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Every website I've signup for I've also logged into at least once. Usually more than once. Frequency isn't the reason, it's optimizing for sign-ups. Once you get someone to sign-up, they're going to login even if the button is a little smaller.

▲

pluralmonad a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You sign up once and login an arbitrary number of times. Not sure how signing up is ever the more frequent path. I've signed up for things I use maybe at most twice throughout a lifetime. Logins I couldn't even begin to count.

▲

interloxia a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I love clearing cookies.

▲

dzhiurgis a day ago | parent [-]

They can still follow you

	▲	two_handfuls a day ago \| parent [-]
		No reason to make it easy for them though.

▲

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

gunalx a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Your tokens should defiently have expiry times on the range that you would need to login again.

▲

londons_explore a day ago | parent [-]

I would prefer a 999 year login cookie.

A well designed browser stores the cookies with similar security to the built in password manager anyway

▲

ffsm8 a day ago | parent [-]

That's not true, you need to provide a password to read the passwords saved in the browser whereas cookies can be read without any hassle from the developer tools

Cookies can also be queried programmatically, whereas passwords need to have the users auto fill active and interact with the input element

Most extensions have effectively full access to your cookies, not to your passwords - which is a real attack vector (session exfiltration) which is actively being used by had acteues

There are ofc server set cookies which are not programmatically queryable, but that's not the norm (and they're still visible via the developer tools, so the core statement remains untrue)

	▲	mmmmbbbhb 20 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> Cookies can also be queried programmatically, Misleading statement, essentially untrue. > Most extensions have effectively full access to your cookies False. > There are ofc server set cookies which are not programmatically queryable, but that's not the norm That is the norm for login cookies. > and they're still visible via the developer tools, This is irrelevant to the argument.
	▲	watermelon0 a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I’m quite sure that server set cookies are the norm for authentication, at least where they are set from the server side.

▲

stranded22 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Same for me too. Hunting for the login whilst a massive splash screen for sign up

▲

mDyJzDPmBdG 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Is it really that common? On some sites the only way to find signup is to first go to login page