3 ms·
A lot of this applies to web-design for (what should be) static sites as well. The more complex and "engaging" you make your site, the less likely people are ab
by CaptSpify 9y ago
A lot of this applies to web-design for (what should be) static sites as well. The more complex and "engaging" you make your site, the less likely people are able to read it cleanly. I wonder if anyone is doing a/b testing with those as well?
KISS
- phil21 9y agoAt this point that is a feature, not a bug. That's the only explanation as almost all websites for products/services you don't already know of are utterly useless at explaining what precisely it is they do. I still get pretty upset by this and try to avoid buying from such companies whenever possible in my professional role, but I'm pretty convinced it's on purpose so you have to call someone and let them "engage" you in the "value add" sales process.
- shimon 9y agoMaybe. But in many cases it's not a deliberate choice about motivating user behavior, it's about satisfying some highly-paid person's idea of how their business is special so the design must also be special. OR they really have it together, and the design works great for their specific target buyer while turning off irrelevant folks like you.
- devmunchies 9y agoI think the KISS acronym is better if you swap the last two "S" words so that its keep it stupid simple. It changes the acronym a bit from KISS to KISS but use your imagination.