4 ms·

Comments like these remind of an old post on Slashdot, "What makes a good website?" Ask "geeks" what they prefer, it's usually minimalism, no images, consistent

Comments like these remind of an old post on Slashdot, "What makes a good website?" Ask "geeks" what they prefer, it's usually minimalism, no images, consistent text styling. In the end, the ideal format becomes a text file without markup. I think we need to accept the opinions of techies are increasingly irrelevant in tech. It's like being fine artist getting paid to design flyers or a chef making burgers.

raphaelj 6y ago
Wrong. The average user does not give a shit if the page is rendered server-side, or of it's a SPA. Geeks prefer speed, like everyone. There are plenty of papers that show that a reduction in latency improves the conversion rate. And it's does not have to be ugly to be fast.
umvi 6y ago
Geeks prefer function over form Consumers (apparently) prefer form over function (or at least, they are more easily fooled into thinking the more form, the more function)
- mellow2020 6y ago
  I prefer form to follow function. Make it as pretty as you can, but not at the expense of the function.
notyourwork 6y ago
Performance need not be coupled to idea of minimalist design. A performant website can still look like Facebook and not take 5000 ms to load.
function_seven 6y ago
Everyone hates slow webpages. Not just geeks. We can all argue over whether minimalism or eye-candy is preferred. But if your site feels like running in mud, it's frustrating regardless of the design. And all these SPA, client-side rendered, sites seems guilty of this. You navigate to a page, and it loads up "instantly", except you see nothing but gray placeholder images. Then content starts loading in, but haphazardly. You see a link you want to click, and you go to click it, when BAM! it jumps down 37 pixels because some stupid widget just loaded above it on the page. I really hate the modern web. Not the look of it, or the styling. The mechanics and slowness.
- ravenstine 6y ago
  I hope we someday enter a period of reform where our field begins to apply more rigor to our process. We have the tools to make a fast, sleek web. The process is very, very broken from an engineering perspective. The money seems to never stop, which is why businesses can burn through developers without too much regard to whether they are doing the right things. Maybe that can't be fixed, because the people in charge are going to keep the status quo going if the money is coming in and they're made to look good. Optimization is a risk that companies of even modest size find to be too great. Or perhaps people involved in a revamp/redesign/unification should be well compensated to the point where they are unlikely to leave in the middle of a multi-year project. I have a feeling based on my experience that a lot of these bad rebuilds are a result of too many engineers and designers coming and going.
hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
But, perhaps ironically, Slashdot was killed because its design updates made it more "designer-y" but much less usable. I remember one update in particular that added a ton of whitespace, gave it a "cleaner" look I guess, but it meant there were like 1/4 of the posts on the screen so it just took longer to peruse the comments. They also f'd up how they showed voting so it became much harder to just scan for popular comments and valuable discussion. I remember going to Slashdot pretty much daily and after that update just said screw this, will have to find something else. Design updates can be useful, but just like for engineers, "beware lots of highly paid people looking for something to do".
- ryandrake 6y ago
  Yea, I left Slashdot after The Great Redesign, and other websites too for similar reasons. It seems to be this inevitable milestone in any website's (or, generally, software's) life: - V1: Focused, works, fast, lacks some features, but good enough to grow - V1.1: More features, still performs well, exponential community growth - V1.2: Adds chat, messages, social, loses focus, performance starts to suffer, linear or slowing growth - V1.3: Start loading up with ads, things are getting worse, usage plateaus or teeters [EMERGENCY! HIRE THE DESIGNERS!] - V2.0: Huge, unnecessary re-design [1] without community input. Most features gone. More ads. Community craters. This is the Fark.com "You'll get over it" phase. - V2.1: Saturated with ads, founders have moved on, site is on autopilot, a shell of what it used to be. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnVeysllPDI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnVeysllPDI
jhhh 6y ago
It's Facebook's own standard: "We knew we wanted Facebook.com to start up fast, respond fast, and provide a highly interactive experience.". The person you're responding to is saying they haven't met their own metrics for success based on their experience. You can't really attribute this "preference" solely to them.
_jal 6y ago
First, that's just wrong. "Geeks", as a class, will tend to focus on technical issues before aesthetic ones. Looking at that fact and immediately equating it to an absurd extreme is a fun game, if you don't care about describing reality. I know some accomplished engineers who are also good designers, and vice-versa. Second, if my professional opinions are not being taken seriously, that usually means one of two things: I'm too far out over my skis, or am in the wrong place with the wrong people. Especially so if you feel like a chef making burgers. Of course, if "in total control" and "irrelevant" are the only two states of being one sees, I suppose I see how you get there.

raphaelj 6y ago

Wrong. The average user does not give a shit if the page is rendered server-side, or of it's a SPA. Geeks prefer speed, like everyone. There are plenty of papers that show that a reduction in latency improves the conversion rate. And it's does not have to be ugly to be fast.

umvi 6y ago

Geeks prefer function over form Consumers (apparently) prefer form over function (or at least, they are more easily fooled into thinking the more form, the more function)

mellow2020 6y ago
I prefer form to follow function. Make it as pretty as you can, but not at the expense of the function.

notyourwork 6y ago

Performance need not be coupled to idea of minimalist design. A performant website can still look like Facebook and not take 5000 ms to load.

function_seven 6y ago

Everyone hates slow webpages. Not just geeks. We can all argue over whether minimalism or eye-candy is preferred. But if your site feels like running in mud, it's frustrating regardless of the design. And all these SPA, client-side rendered, sites seems guilty of this. You navigate to a page, and it loads up "instantly", except you see nothing but gray placeholder images. Then content starts loading in, but haphazardly. You see a link you want to click, and you go to click it, when BAM! it jumps down 37 pixels because some stupid widget just loaded above it on the page. I really hate the modern web. Not the look of it, or the styling. The mechanics and slowness.

ravenstine 6y ago
I hope we someday enter a period of reform where our field begins to apply more rigor to our process. We have the tools to make a fast, sleek web. The process is very, very broken from an engineering perspective. The money seems to never stop, which is why businesses can burn through developers without too much regard to whether they are doing the right things. Maybe that can't be fixed, because the people in charge are going to keep the status quo going if the money is coming in and they're made to look good. Optimization is a risk that companies of even modest size find to be too great. Or perhaps people involved in a revamp/redesign/unification should be well compensated to the point where they are unlikely to leave in the middle of a multi-year project. I have a feeling based on my experience that a lot of these bad rebuilds are a result of too many engineers and designers coming and going.

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago

But, perhaps ironically, Slashdot was killed because its design updates made it more "designer-y" but much less usable. I remember one update in particular that added a ton of whitespace, gave it a "cleaner" look I guess, but it meant there were like 1/4 of the posts on the screen so it just took longer to peruse the comments. They also f'd up how they showed voting so it became much harder to just scan for popular comments and valuable discussion. I remember going to Slashdot pretty much daily and after that update just said screw this, will have to find something else. Design updates can be useful, but just like for engineers, "beware lots of highly paid people looking for something to do".

ryandrake 6y ago
Yea, I left Slashdot after The Great Redesign, and other websites too for similar reasons. It seems to be this inevitable milestone in any website's (or, generally, software's) life: - V1: Focused, works, fast, lacks some features, but good enough to grow - V1.1: More features, still performs well, exponential community growth - V1.2: Adds chat, messages, social, loses focus, performance starts to suffer, linear or slowing growth - V1.3: Start loading up with ads, things are getting worse, usage plateaus or teeters [EMERGENCY! HIRE THE DESIGNERS!] - V2.0: Huge, unnecessary re-design [1] without community input. Most features gone. More ads. Community craters. This is the Fark.com "You'll get over it" phase. - V2.1: Saturated with ads, founders have moved on, site is on autopilot, a shell of what it used to be. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnVeysllPDI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnVeysllPDI

jhhh 6y ago

It's Facebook's own standard: "We knew we wanted Facebook.com to start up fast, respond fast, and provide a highly interactive experience.". The person you're responding to is saying they haven't met their own metrics for success based on their experience. You can't really attribute this "preference" solely to them.

_jal 6y ago

First, that's just wrong. "Geeks", as a class, will tend to focus on technical issues before aesthetic ones. Looking at that fact and immediately equating it to an absurd extreme is a fun game, if you don't care about describing reality. I know some accomplished engineers who are also good designers, and vice-versa. Second, if my professional opinions are not being taken seriously, that usually means one of two things: I'm too far out over my skis, or am in the wrong place with the wrong people. Especially so if you feel like a chef making burgers. Of course, if "in total control" and "irrelevant" are the only two states of being one sees, I suppose I see how you get there.