3 ms·

Very true. But it still bothers me that a burrito / pork chops rating app gets so much success based on its good looks.

ddagradi 15y ago
I can't disagree more strongly. Neither of those apps is successful because they look good. "Good looks" implies an exceptional attention to detail, a deep understanding of the medium, and a solid experience. More often than not, a beautifully designed piece of software will be easy to use, intuitive, and full of surprises. It makes me want to install it because I _know_ that I'm in for a treat. And when I launch it, my suspicions are confirmed with an app that works exactly as expected without hassle or surprise. Good design is a side-effect of lovingly crafted code and a well-thought out process.
ebzlo 15y ago
The bottleneck they overcome (that you don't) is that they get the user to download the app. Once a user has downloaded an app, it matters much less how much friction there is to start using it. It would take a lot to turn them away from using the app at that point.
gnaffle 15y ago
I don't think they get success only because of good looks, but because they do something useful or fun. Between a dozen similarly useful apps, the ones that look good are the ones that will get coverage and be popular. If your idea is truly as revolutionary and unique as you think, it could probably look like shit and still be popular.
evilduck 15y ago
Why do you care so much about an app that you're not competing with? Fart apps were wildly successful too.
- stangeek 15y ago
  We don't really care, it was just an easy way to try to make people smile and upvote the article in HN.
aneth 15y ago
Belittling others' successes is bad form and indicative of a a sense of entitlement and superiority. Oink is interesting and beautiful, Kevin Rose is smart and decent. Your app is neither and you sound bitter. It is not surprising to an objective observer that you were ignored. A little more humility might allow you to learn some lessons here.
- stangeek 15y ago
  Ok. Our joke might have been lost in translation - we actually think KR is very smart.
AznHisoka 15y ago
Don't overestimate their success too. Oink has gotten lots of downloads, but little revenue to show for it. Focus on your own battles, and don't think everyone out there is winning.
chlee 15y ago
Its a psychological effect called Aesthetic-Usability effect (as noted in the book Universal Principles of Design). Given two equal equipment/software/things/etc, the user will perceive the more-aesthetic designs to be easier to use than its less-aesthetic counterparts. This is because "beautiful" designs help fosters a positive attitude between the users and the product. This then translate to feeling of affection, loyalty, and patience in the product -- all of which are critical factors in long-term usability and overall success of a design. Its a well documented cognitive/psychological phenomenon. "Design of Emotional Things" dedicated an entire chapter to this concept.

I can't disagree more strongly. Neither of those apps is successful because they look good. "Good looks" implies an exceptional attention to detail, a deep understanding of the medium, and a solid experience. More often than not, a beautifully designed piece of software will be easy to use, intuitive, and full of surprises. It makes me want to install it because I _know_ that I'm in for a treat. And when I launch it, my suspicions are confirmed with an app that works exactly as expected without hassle or surprise. Good design is a side-effect of lovingly crafted code and a well-thought out process.

ebzlo 15y ago

The bottleneck they overcome (that you don't) is that they get the user to download the app. Once a user has downloaded an app, it matters much less how much friction there is to start using it. It would take a lot to turn them away from using the app at that point.

gnaffle 15y ago

I don't think they get success only because of good looks, but because they do something useful or fun. Between a dozen similarly useful apps, the ones that look good are the ones that will get coverage and be popular. If your idea is truly as revolutionary and unique as you think, it could probably look like shit and still be popular.

evilduck 15y ago

Why do you care so much about an app that you're not competing with? Fart apps were wildly successful too.

stangeek 15y ago
We don't really care, it was just an easy way to try to make people smile and upvote the article in HN.

aneth 15y ago

Belittling others' successes is bad form and indicative of a a sense of entitlement and superiority. Oink is interesting and beautiful, Kevin Rose is smart and decent. Your app is neither and you sound bitter. It is not surprising to an objective observer that you were ignored. A little more humility might allow you to learn some lessons here.

stangeek 15y ago
Ok. Our joke might have been lost in translation - we actually think KR is very smart.

AznHisoka 15y ago

Don't overestimate their success too. Oink has gotten lots of downloads, but little revenue to show for it. Focus on your own battles, and don't think everyone out there is winning.

chlee 15y ago

Its a psychological effect called Aesthetic-Usability effect (as noted in the book Universal Principles of Design). Given two equal equipment/software/things/etc, the user will perceive the more-aesthetic designs to be easier to use than its less-aesthetic counterparts. This is because "beautiful" designs help fosters a positive attitude between the users and the product. This then translate to feeling of affection, loyalty, and patience in the product -- all of which are critical factors in long-term usability and overall success of a design. Its a well documented cognitive/psychological phenomenon. "Design of Emotional Things" dedicated an entire chapter to this concept.