2 ms·
Am I the only one who's fascinated by the UX of this site? It's just so clear and so usable. It resembles to https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://motherfuc
by sz4kerto 8y ago
Am I the only one who's fascinated by the UX of this site? It's just so clear and so usable. It resembles to https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ but it's not a gag, it's an actual site.
- dasmoth 8y agoYes, I like it. I'm not sure https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ https://motherfuckingwebsite.com/ is the analogy I'd make though. It uses a non-trivial amount of CSS (about 5k) -- but not so much that it'll slow most people's downloads, and not a big "framework". It's got some somewhat distinctive branding -- you'll know instantly if you navigate away from the site -- but the elements don't take up too much of the screen. It actually has some responsive elements (try making your browser window narrow). There's a few lines of JS to make the drop down menus work. But again, nothing huge. It doesn't seem to be consciously avoiding anything. It looks to me like the work of someone who's started from a clean sheet and is trying to build a site that works for them rather than ticking off a list of best practices. And yes, I like the results.
- PostPost 8y agoWhat's ridiculous is that the design paradigm of "removing the unnecessary" shows up everywhere today with hardware (goodbye headphone jack) even as the exact opposite has happened with the majority of software. And by ridiculous I mean "worthy of ridicule" because as developers, we're largely the people responsible for cramming in more tracking, frameworks, features, and styling into the work we create.