5 ms·
What is it about usability guys and their shitty, shitty websites? That Tufte page is a wall of red (and red underlined!) smashed together links. Just needs an
by glhaynes 14y ago
What is it about usability guys and their shitty, shitty websites?
That Tufte page is a wall of red (and red underlined!) smashed together links. Just needs an Under Construction sign and a starfield background. [I'm certain the content is very good - I enjoy reading/listening to Tufte.]
I remember reading an article from usability guru Donald Norman a few years ago, another person whom I respect and enjoy reading. His (awesome) article was all about how aesthetics matter and are a key part not just of being beautiful, but about being usable. I wrote him an email asking (nicely) why his webpage containing that article was so ugly and had such poor typography, then; he promptly wrote back saying that it'd take too much time to format it nicely when there's too much to do already. sigh
- harrylove 14y agoYou mean like this? http://www.useit.com/ http://www.useit.com/ I would make a distinction between designers and researchers in the field. The researchers and scholars, almost without fail, seem to care the least about their own website aesthetics.
- dredmorbius 14y agoNielsen's site may not be a thing of beauty, but 1) it works, 2) it's usable, and 3) it is unchanged in style from when it first appeared. How many sites can make the same claim: that they created a design and it has worked for 17 years of Web evolution? It's a tour de force of Neilsen's key message: usability is design, and it works.