3 ms·
I don't want to sound like an asshole but: 1. The homepage really doesn't prove the attention to detail thing. It can be improved a lot. By the time someone wr
by cateye 15y ago
I don't want to sound like an asshole but:
1. The homepage really doesn't prove the attention to detail thing. It can be improved a lot. By the time someone wrote this blog post, he could have fixed that. (I really liked reading the post, do not get me wrong.)
2. Aesthetics is important. But would it really be less appealing if it was plain Arial/Helvetica? Would you bet your money on it by A/B testing? I wouldn't.
These discussions end always in: design is important versus code is important. But that is completely not my point.
My point is that it is often, not very wise to spend disproportionately time to trivial considerations. I don't know your "proportions" so I may have no value judgment about that.
- jaysonelliot 15y agoYou're trying to refute the importance of the design through assertive statements like number 2 above, and yes, you are making the point that design is not important by calling the typography a "trivial consideration." The fact that you don't understand why it's important to do typography well, and think that it's okay to just use Arial, doesn't mean that it is a trivial matter. That's the kind of thinking that led to the look of Windows 3.1, and I would argue that while Windows might have been the winner at the cash register, it was a lesser product. I applaud the Prismatic team for focusing on quality. MVPs have their place, but eventually you have to stop counting beans and think about making something great. That's hardly trivial.