4 ms·
More pleasing to the eyes and not from the 90s. A more attractive site wouldn't turn people off as soon as they visit it and would yield more users and support.
by hanniabu 4y ago
More pleasing to the eyes and not from the 90s. A more attractive site wouldn't turn people off as soon as they visit it and would yield more users and support. Ubuntu's site for example looks nicer and only 0.1mb larger.
- steelframe 4y agoAre you volunteering to redo debian.org? Because that's how this works.
- npteljes 4y agoThat's not how it works. I don't think the people on top of the debian community would just let anyone redesign their home page, even if the website would be objectively better in some regard.
- steelframe 4y agoOh, there would be a debate, for sure. It will probably go through a lot of bikeshedding. But if you demonstrate competence and commitment and stroke the right egos, it can certainly happen.
- bandrami 4y agoNow compare the two on Lynx
- BrotherBisquick 4y agoI never thought i'd meet the guy who actually likes web bloat, and on HN of all places. I thought you were just a legend, like Kayser Soeze.
- npteljes 4y agoI don't think a nice website would translate to that much more benefits, like new Debian users. If Debian was an online clothes retailer, and they wanted to compete with other such websites like asos.com, they'd need a website like them. But even then, Craigslist is also very popular, and the website design is similarly dated.