This design looks so cheap to me, it's just a bunch of random covers, there is no information about the movies presented in any way, the covers are way too big and take up an inordinate amount of space and there is nothing breaking up sections, design is just so fucking dumb now, fuck mobile

rant over 😅

screenshot of the hbo max web site, it's just large screen shots of movie covers, not even the official movie covers just random ones some that look like shit, it looks really cheap

top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 142 points 3 months ago (21 children)

UI's for movie streaming services are not designed to help you find something to watch. They are designed to keep you "engaged", which means in the platform and not realizing that the pool of actually interesting things is about as deep as a puddle. Everything about streaming sites' design is user hostile and this is a classic example of that.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 3 months ago (18 children)

    Isn't Jellyfin the same design as all the streaming platform and they have nothing to gain for keeping you engaged?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] 71 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    Yeah but they don't have highly paid UX design teams, so they're probably just copying design choices on the basis that they're trying to offer people a similar experience they can own.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (6 children)

    That's bullshit. These are basic design principles they teach in every single design school in the world. You don't need "highly paid design teams" you just need someone with some education.

    And this design philosophy has apparently invaded every single corporation on Planet Earth, so I really have no fucking idea where designers are even employed lately.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    And this design philosophy has apparently invaded every single corporation on Planet Earth, so I really have no fucking idea where designers are even employed lately.

    That's because they employ you and then force you to do bullshit things

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    I bought ice trays recently that had no way to stack, and literally shattered the second time I tried removing ice. Ice trays. ICE. FUCKING. TRAYS. WEVE HAD ICE TRAYS FOR LIKE 100 GODDAMN YEARS. WHY ARE WE STILL STRUGGLING WITH DESIGNING ICE TRAYS???

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)

    We await your contributions to the project (you won't ever contribute)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 26 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Almost, but it has movie titles under the poster/cover and usually pulls the actual movie covers.

    Once you click into it, it gives a shitton of detail about the movie.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Once you click into it, it gives a shitton of detail about the movie.

    Is this not the case with netflix/hbo? Sorry i never actually used any streaming service before other than Jellyfin so i don't understand what is the issue here

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Two things off the top of my head:

    • Jellyfin displays ratings from RT (and opencritic maybe?), while Netflix has stopped displaying their own user ratings years ago.

    • Jellyfin displays the full cast and crew. When you click an actor, director,... it shows you other media where they appear, even individual episodes. Netflix has none of that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 59 points 3 months ago* (30 children)

    My local movie theater in the heart of downtown has taken down all the movie posters outside the entrance and replaced them with a single screen that only shows ads for overpriced popcorn "deals".

    Before, anyone walking by knew which movies were currently playing; now, all they know is just how outrageously expensive the popcorn is.

    I haven't been to that theater since.

  • source
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (21 children)
  • [–] 11 points 3 months ago (20 children)

    Yeah, I guess I should. I just can't quite understand how anyone could fail to realize how absurd it is for a movie theater to use its most prominent advertising space not for promoting its movie lineup, but for food offerings.

    To me, this strongly suggests that this movie theater—which is part of a large chain—now sees its main product as food rather than movies.

    I have absolutely no sympathy for that, and I can only applaud it when a company like that loses customers because of its own idiocy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Movie theaters main products has always been food.

    Movie theaters have never made money off the movies they show, they make their money off the food they sell. It has been that way for at least 50 years.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    That may be so, but the popcorn with chemical “pee” has never been what pulls in customers. The movies were always the draw, even if food was the profit. Advertising that food seems short-sighted: who cares if you sell popcorn to a higher percentage of customers but you’re pulling in fewer customers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    Not really "never", but the standard movie deals have long called for the studios to get a 90% cut of the box for the first two weeks a movie runs, then it switches to a 50/50 split the rest of the way. Nobody seems to have noticed that this arrangement incentivizes movie studios to produce overhyped pieces of shit so that no good movie with serious staying power cannibalizes their own revenue stream. Just a total coincidence that most movies now are overhyped pieces of shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    You’re right, but to the suits: what makes the profit is the drinks and the popcorn. Selling popcorn to a higher percentage of customers will make them more money, even if they sell less tickets, because the tickets don’t make money. Hell, sell less tickets with a higher proportion of popcorn sales and you can probably schedule less people/save on labor.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Food probably actually is their main product. Granted it's been a very long time since I worked in a movie theatre but when I did they told us that of $14 or so of ticket price they only made about 50c and that candy bar sales were actually their real business.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago

    Yes, that’s true, of course, but you’re not going to sell much if you don’t promote the lineup that actually draws in the customers, would you?

    I mean, before, all you had to do was walk past the movie theater to find out what was playing. Like many others, I walk past it very often, and I’ve often spotted a movie that interested me and then come back a few days later to watch it.

    Now I have to actively check their website to find out what movies are currently playing, which I don’t do very often.

    The theater operators must be fully aware of this—as well as of the fact that the food options they’re now exclusively promoting are so expensive that they’re more likely to deter potential visitors than attract them.

    It’s as if an attractive tourist destination were to advertise overpriced tourist-trap restaurants instead of the sights that make the destination appealing in the first place—and that would at least make the inflated prices somewhat understandable.

    That should be obvious to any marketer or, for that matter, the management in charge. Customers, of course, aren’t interested in which products yield the highest profit margin for the company, but rather in what they get for their money—after all, no one goes to the movies for the popcorn, but for the films themselves. I’d say anyone who doesn’t understand that is completely out of place in this business. The experience has to be the movie; everything else is just an afterthought.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 3 points 3 months ago (12 children)
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Well, I rarely plan to go to the movies—only on rare occasions, when I know a new movie I want to see is coming out.

    I used to walk past the movie theater a lot, though, and see the posters and that’s how I found out about movies I didn’t know anything about or maybe knew of them but forgot. So it happened at least on occasion that I’d call some friends to go see the movie I’d just discovered by walking by the theater - on the weekend or something, not right away, of course.

    I never really cared about the food options. Of course, I’d still buy popcorn and stuff, but a discount on it—after which the popcorn is still outrageously expensive—was just as little a motivation for me to go to the movies as any fancy seats or whatever. That’s all well and good, but it’s never been a reason for me to go to the movies. I went because of the movies—which I’d now have to research on my own, something I don’t do.

    So: It may well be that I’m the exception. But in any case, I haven’t been to the movies since they replaced the posters with food ads. As I said, that’s simply because I don’t actively look up the lineup and therefore don’t realize that there might be a movie playing that would interest me—I certainly don’t care at all about the current popcorn prices, though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Of course, I have a general idea. All I'm saying is that it was convenient to see what was playing at the movie theater when I walked by, as I do almost every day. You might not be able to imagine it, but the lineups also vary by country—even from city to city.

    I just don't actively look up the movie schedule, which I could do, of course. But I just don't.

    It’s like, say, the menu at a cafeteria: I could look it up online, but since you’re constantly walking past it at work anyway, it’s nice when the weekly menu is posted right in front of it. That way, you can see what’s for lunch even if you hadn’t actually planned on going to the cafeteria.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I agree with the other guy here. I don’t go to the movies often so have no reason to keep up with what is showing. While I know how to look it up, why would I?

    Yes, I am an example where advertising what is showing some place I can see it with no friction could make a difference in whether I go

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    I usually goto the theater for a specific show, usually buy the ticket online ….

    BUT, there are times, such as when I didn’t get a ticket ahead of time and my show is sold out, where I’m in front of the theater deciding whether to go in. It I see an interesting looking movie, I might see that. If the food advertising worked, it would have the opposite of the intended effect “why don’t we goto a restaurant instead ?”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 3 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (5 children)

    There’s usually a signat the ticket booth. Maybe it’s alone, maybe title only,maybe it’s only visible from being at the window …. It’s generally not useful to pick an unexpected/unknown movie.

    A good movie poster shows a snapshot of the genre, the basic plot, the main characters, all of which I might use to pick a movie

    If it’s inconvenient to see my choices, If they make me go somewhere else, or goto their web site, I’m at least as likely to just leave

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 3 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Yes?

    Who just walks past the movies and spontaneously decides to see a movie because they saw a poster for it at the movies?

    That was a real life scenario where having movie posters visible would sell more tickets, to answer your question

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 3 months ago (2 children)
  • [+] -8 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    Dude come on.. No one goes to the theater to find out what is playing there and no one has done that for well over a decade.

    Your rant is silly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Well, that’s how it was for me at least. The movie theater is right in the middle of town, which is why you’re constantly passing by it anyway. I don’t actively look up the current movie lineup, but I used to always be up to date because I passed by that theater almost every day and saw the posters.

    Now I’m no longer informed about the current lineup, but instead only about the absurd prices for popcorn and stuff—I can’t say that motivates me to go to the theater’s website to see what’s playing.

    Like I said: I haven’t been to the theater since they took down the posters. That’s not because tickets and popcorn would be too expensive for me, but because I have no idea which movies are playing right now. I don’t go out of my way to find out myself, but I used to walk past the theater and think, “Oh, cool, movie xyy is playing—I should go see that with friends this weekend.” That effect is now gone so I don't go to the movies anymore.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    So what should be glaringly clear to you is that you are no longer the target demographic for theater attendance. That information is all relayed through the app on the phone, as are ticket sales, seating arrangements and really the purchasing of food.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    I guess I’m not the target demographic either then. I don’t think I ever was really, but as a parent of teens, if I do go in, it’s likely to be a family’s worth of tickets.

    Maybe you think the rest of us are a minority that doesn’t matter but it seems short sighted to disregard potential customers

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago*

    I have been going to the movies for about 50 years and I never found out what was in the theater by show up and walking up to the theater. I sure didnt do it when I was taking my family there, I did it with the news paper or calling…

    Starting around 1999 I looked online.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Even young people don't have the movie theater's app because it's completely useless. Only people who go to the movies regularly—and are therefore already regular customers—might use such an app. Of course, there are also promotional campaigns by the operators designed to encourage people to download their useless app—but I’m pretty sure most people only do that to get the discount and then delete the app right away.

    Young people, in particular, can of course be reached through social media ads and the like, but you don’t seem to realize how expensive that is. I can hardly imagine that a local movie theater—or even a chain with many local locations—could achieve a halfway decent ROAS through this or other online marketing channels.

    So in my opinion, it’s simply idiotic to ignore the prime advertising space this movie theater already has—after all, it costs almost nothing to hang a few extra posters on its own building. They could even do that alongside the food ads, which would make optimal use of this free advertising space. But they don’t do that; instead, they’ve removed all the movie posters for a single screen with food ads no one cares about.

    I can’t understand the reason for that. If it has to be one or the other—which isn’t necessary at all—I think movie posters are much more effective. I mean, let’s be honest: Which is more useful to potential customers? Knowing which movie is currently playing—something you notice as you walk by, regardless of your age—or an ad for a small discount on tacos or something similar, that are still very expensive even after the discount?

    Oh, and just to be clear: Of course, it doesn't matter at all whether they're actually posters or screens displaying the movie lineup.

    The point is the informational value, which, of course, exists in the real world as well, not just online.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    This may also be why they overly focus on blockbusters. Without traditional means of seeing what’s playing, I’m only aware of a movie if it’s been heavily advertised. You’d think trying the cheap route would be … cheaper

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    Yes, that seems plausible to me. I can’t say why the movie theater near me isn’t putting up posters or any info anymore, but since I don’t know the details that led to this decision, it simply seems like an awful idea on the part of management to me.

    It could be that the film distributors no longer provide the necessary promotional material, though that also seems pretty silly, since it would hardly incur any significant costs. It is also possible that there are some major players that don't want that because it would benefit them (small companies can't compete with big capital that is needed for online ad campaigns).

    Maybe it’s also due to some city regulations.

    I can’t say for sure which or any of these might be the case, but I could very well imagine that it’s due to incompetence on the part of the theater’s operators. Although this is a nationwide, I think even international chain, that doesn’t seem to me to guarantee that there’s a plausible reason. Maybe it was a cost-cutting suggestion from a completely incompetent consultant who looked at some Excel spreadsheets and came up with the idea that the labor costs for putting up posters were an expense that could be cut. That wouldn’t surprise me at all.

    But anyways, I just noticed that the movie schedule at my local theater is no longer visible when you walk by. To me, that’s a loss, and I think some others might feel the same way—because while you can, of course, find information online, since this is a local offering, it seems ridiculous to me not to provide the relevant information on-site as well, especially since it could be done very, very inexpensively.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 46 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    Web/UI design in general has sucked for at least 14 years now. Everything is spaced too far apart and text/images are too big. Icons are used for critical functionality instead of words. Pointless animations and gradients slow everything down for no reason.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago

    The thing that drives me the craziest is when a long title or sentence or whatever is just truncated with ellipses, even when there is ENORMOUS blank white space around it that would easily allow the whole thing to be shown with word-wrapping. Youtube shorts is the most egregious example of this, and they recently managed to make it even worse. It used to be that you could open up the comments for a short and that would make the entire long title readable, but they "fixed" that so it stays ellipsized even then.

    The app I use at work to clock in and out ellipsizes my own name halfway through my middle name, and it could be easily fixed by just stretching the control that displays the name all the way to each edge. I used to be a mobile app developer and I know exactly why this happens: the UI designer uses a bogus short name like "Bob Smith" on the original design document and the developer who implements it puts in a control just big enough for that. I used to encounter this kind of thing and I would fix it with common sense, and then the UI designer would get mad and insist that my fix be reverted, even though that resulted in something that couldn't display the information properly.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Icons are used for critical functionality instead of words.

    Not just web ui. I've noticed this trend with applications as well. It's much harder to learn new applications now because you have to look up a guide for everything. Hovering over the icons doesn't even work as often as it should.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago

    I just discovered a new function on my car - when I listen to music, a small rectangle appears with audio controls ….. apparently it a tile that can be scrolled left and right to see other data. I never would have thought to try that if I didn’t read it somewhere, no visual cues

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    What was was so great about web design in 2012? It was barely any different back then except for being much worse on phones. And the main reason for your complaints is the need to accommodate phones and tablets.

    If it were 2012 now I'm almost certain you'd be whining that we need to go back to the nonresponsive table designs of the 90s

    I feel like I'm sharing this website with a bunch of crotchety old men who just want to complain about everything

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    You're right, but 2012 is when they started paying too much attention to mobile and it started to bleed into everything else.

    The 90s was clearly better, UI-wise, so yes, I wish people would go back to that.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    This is largely part of being on multilingual web. It costs a lot of engineering time and effort to try and translate a page to multiple languages, but icons infer meaning without this need.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    Not true ime, icons are supposed to have tooltip text to meet accessibility requirements. Icons are mainly used to save space, which helps on mobile.

    Of course many companies suck at design and don't bother with the tooltip.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 38 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    And make sure everything you mouseover trying to get a blurb or something instead just jumps around like a Jack Russell terrier trying to grab your attention. I fucking hate having to find a place to park my mouse so it isn't autoplaying some bullshit I have no interest in.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 32 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Everything about using the internet and its various “services” has turned to absolute garbage in the last 15 years.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    It's what happens when you let marketing dickheads be in charge of everything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Marketing has the polar opposite to the desired effect on me. I hate it so much that I actively avoid anything that is trying to sell to me. I make my purchasing choices based of a mixture of function, need and impulse (thanks ADHD)

    I always check things out for myself and research carefully to find what I need.

    This applys to tv as well. Which is why I set up jellyfin and put on an eyepatch.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 26 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    It's all about driving metrics now. If people need to click on/select a movie to see more about it then that adds numbers to page views and increases time spent in the app. They can also see who and how many do or don't watch a movie after clicking on it to further drive their algorithms.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 71 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    I'm so here for this.

    It's genuinely infuriating to see a hundred years of movie poster art evolution discarded. It's the first part of a movie's artistic statement you ever see, and it gets summarily tossed in the trash so that Netflix's internal overworked engagement metrics team can spend 2 minutes grabbing random shots of different stars in the film, slap single-color generic font text all over it, and target twelve versions to different demographics to try to get more clicks.

    It's even worse when I tell this to someone and they're like, "I don't really notice."

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 29 points 3 months ago*

    Oh my goodness thank you I finally feel vindicated like no one around me ever mentions anything about it, I do need some more friends lol, but yeah as someone who does design and appreciates good design and knows what a hell creatives put ourselves through to go through the process of making something people love and then it all gets reduced to garbage like this

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 24 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    It’s part of the infuriating trend on removing all words from UIs. God forbid the kids learn how to read a movie title. Using modern apps means navigating a never ending stream of hieroglyphs. The “save”, “load”, “new”, “share” buttons are long gone; replaced with an ever changing series of symbols.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [+] -2 points 3 months ago (11 children)
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    A lot of posters have stylized script in varying sizes and contrast to the background that generally looked fine on big posters but can be hard to read on small icons on a screen.

    Just look at the Dune one in the example. Only the u and n are easy to see because the d and e habe no contrast with the background and the font is heavily stylized. Which Lord Rings and Hobbit movies are those? The subtitles are tiny as fuck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [+] -1 points 3 months ago (9 children)
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (8 children)

    On mobile the icons are about as big as my thumb. On a big screen they are about the size of my thumb held out at arms length. The ratio is basically the same and NO I cannot easily and clearly read every single title on mobile or at a distance, especially the three that I pointed out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] 1 point 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (7 children)
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    I didn't say every single one was hard to read. You took a screenshot of the ones that are easy to read even when the thumbnail is the size of my thumb. What I said was there were plenty like the examples I pointed out for Hobbit and Dune where they were hard or impossible to read.

    You have trouble understanding the difference between a lot of titles and all titles? Maybe you should see someone who can teach you basic reading comprehension skills.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 0 points 3 months ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Weren’t you have a whinge saying that they’re all using the same boring plain white font, and now you’re whining when some use different fonts that you claim are harder to read?

    No, I always said that SOME titles were different fonts and many of those were tiny, with minimal contrast, or heavily stylized and hard to read as thumbnails on TV screens AND mobile devices. Dune, Lord of the Rings, and the Hobbit movies were examples of those specific things because they are in the image in the post.

    You do understand that you are replying to more than one person in the comments, right?

    With ones like the lord of the rings, you can clearly see that it is a lord of the rings film, so just click on it and see which one it is.

    NO. They can make a name clear in the thumbnail. It isn't magic, it just takes a minimal amount of effort per listing.

    How do you suggest the show “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” on the poster without it just being entirely big white text all over the poster?

    The LotR part of the text is perfectly fine, if the rest of it was the same size it would be perfectly fine. Dune could be fine if the text had better contrast.

    Basically they just need to make thumbnails with readable fucking text. The ones in your screenshhttps://piefed.world/post/1294070/comment/6249020#ot are the right size and contrast, but you also took a screenshot of movies and shows with short titles that already had large high contrast fonts in their regular posters. You picked a screenshot of the opposite of what the problem is.

    On your last statement, maybe you need to brush up on your common sense? There’s never going to be a UI that lets you easily read the full title, including sub-title, of every movie ever released, and its poster art, at every resolution from every viewing distance

    YES THEY CAN. If the title is long enough just make it the text. Otherwise all of the images in the bad examples could just have a high contrast overlay with the title over the bottom of the image and it would work perfectly fine.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 18 points 3 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] [S] 8 points 3 months ago* (5 children)

    LOL hey Tanis, like there is zero design elements at all besides the number, no flair, no color, no focus stealer, decades of design out the window lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 5 points 3 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] [S] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

    It's a small world after all it's a small world.. lol. Yah it's kinda cozy 😊 Hope you're having a nice night!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 7 points 3 months ago (4 children)
  • [+] [S] 3 points 3 months ago (3 children)
  • [+] 5 points 3 months ago (3 children)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›