4 ms·
To add to this, the OP's vision benefits the user -- reducing a business's value to its actual raw value as a service rather than a brand. For me, it sounds gr
by jonahx 6mo ago
To add to this, the OP's vision benefits the user -- reducing a business's value to its actual raw value as a service rather than a brand. For me, it sounds great.
But the business's incentives are in the exact opposite direction. That opposite direction is the whole point of branding. They want their service to have a vibe, a personality, something you irrationally value beyond its raw value as a service.
- Swizec 6mo ago> something you irrationally value beyond its raw value as a service Sometimes that feeling is the value. Sure my plants don’t care if they live in a cheap plastic pot off Amazon or a nice pot from the overpriced gardening store selling at a 200% markup, but I care. Sitting in my balcony surrounded by cheap disposable clutter feels different than enjoying the outdoors amidst quality vibes.
- jonahx 6mo agoThat's not irrational at all! Some things are commodities, some are not. The point is only that it's in the interest of commodity businesses to convince you they are not selling commodities. That sleight of hand doesn't prevent genuine quality and artistry from mattering in many cases, including, in your case, pots.
- evolve-maz 6mo agoPresentation of data and a story is a very important part of the service. That's why we have a mix of pictures, tables, paragraphs, etc. It's why UX is so important in general.