3 ms·
> My point wasn't that less professional looking websites > succeed over more professional looking sites. Besides that your point is not true I fail to see how
by rimantas 15y ago
> My point wasn't that less professional looking websites
> succeed over more professional looking sites.
Besides that your point is not true I fail to see how it applies to Apple. Should they remake apple.com to something horribly amateurish, and then they somehow succeed? Are they failing?
And I bet that if some website which looks amateur succeeds over more professionally done the looks is not the key to success.
- davidbalbert 15y agoNo they're not failing over all at all. They're just failing at web stuff (which they keep trying at). I wouldn't change a thing with their hardware business, and as a result I wouldn't change apple.com. I would change me.com though, because it's not a success by any definition of the term. Also, my point was not about whether a site is amateur or professionally done. It's whether the focus is on amateur or professional content. Apple is very good at the latter and not so much at the former which is why they have so much trouble with the web.
- rimantas 15y agoI still don't get what are you talking about. What is that "web stuff" that Apple is failing? What has me.com to do with content, professional or amateur? It is not some blogging platform.