3 ms·

This is a perfectly reasonable explanation that is often overlooked by designers. This also happens to be why I don't particularly love design anymore. What loo

This is a perfectly reasonable explanation that is often overlooked by designers. This also happens to be why I don't particularly love design anymore. What looks right and what converts the best are two different animals, and I don't like purposely creating ugly shit with my name on it.

eksith 13y ago
This is often a result of designers failing to step outside their "designer window", if you will, and step into the users' shoes. It's possible to make something look right and translate that into conversions if you have enough of an outside perspective. That said, it's pretty easy to get too involved in your own work to notice a bigger picture so breaks to step back are highly recommended.
- nikatwork 13y ago
  When I was a/b testing UI designs for a stable of eCommerce sites, quite often the blatantly fugly design would convert much better. Especially for low-price-driven sites. My personal theory was that people figure the unpolished, crappy looking site is more bargain-driven (kinda like a dingy dollar store in real life). Sticking a giant firetruck-red "CONVERT" button surrounded by flames and rainbows really does sell better. But boy does it look awful.
  - jonknee 13y ago
    This is also evidenced by Amazon.com still looking really crowded and ugly. They test every last thing and if this is what they're using, it's because it works.
    - scrapcode 13y ago
      This same concept goes for those horrendously ugly, cookie-cutter, inline sales pages plastered with maroon Comic Sans headlines that have highlighter-yellow backgrounds. I've been there and done that, and the facts prevail. As a good/(as in one that creates aesthetically pleasing things) designer, you actually suck conversion wise. I haven't done much research behind it, but I believe this has to do with why the flat UI is so pleasing. I can only imagine that it is easy for anyone to notice that it's beautiful regardless of technological/design experience/knowledge.
- eflowers 13y ago
  I am glad you pointed this out, your premise is a quintessential example of "UX is not UI." It's not the visual or web designers primary job to A/B test or step into the users shoes on every detail, that's what a responsible and valuable UX person should be doing (note I didn't say UX designer).
j_s 13y ago
The classic blog post on this: http://stopdesign.com/archive/2009/03/20/goodbye-google.html http://stopdesign.com/archive/2009/03/20/goodbye-google.html (aka "41 shades of blue").

eksith 13y ago

This is often a result of designers failing to step outside their "designer window", if you will, and step into the users' shoes. It's possible to make something look right and translate that into conversions if you have enough of an outside perspective. That said, it's pretty easy to get too involved in your own work to notice a bigger picture so breaks to step back are highly recommended.

nikatwork 13y ago
When I was a/b testing UI designs for a stable of eCommerce sites, quite often the blatantly fugly design would convert much better. Especially for low-price-driven sites. My personal theory was that people figure the unpolished, crappy looking site is more bargain-driven (kinda like a dingy dollar store in real life). Sticking a giant firetruck-red "CONVERT" button surrounded by flames and rainbows really does sell better. But boy does it look awful.
- jonknee 13y ago
  This is also evidenced by Amazon.com still looking really crowded and ugly. They test every last thing and if this is what they're using, it's because it works.
  - scrapcode 13y ago
    This same concept goes for those horrendously ugly, cookie-cutter, inline sales pages plastered with maroon Comic Sans headlines that have highlighter-yellow backgrounds. I've been there and done that, and the facts prevail. As a good/(as in one that creates aesthetically pleasing things) designer, you actually suck conversion wise. I haven't done much research behind it, but I believe this has to do with why the flat UI is so pleasing. I can only imagine that it is easy for anyone to notice that it's beautiful regardless of technological/design experience/knowledge.
eflowers 13y ago
I am glad you pointed this out, your premise is a quintessential example of "UX is not UI." It's not the visual or web designers primary job to A/B test or step into the users shoes on every detail, that's what a responsible and valuable UX person should be doing (note I didn't say UX designer).

j_s 13y ago

The classic blog post on this: http://stopdesign.com/archive/2009/03/20/goodbye-google.html http://stopdesign.com/archive/2009/03/20/goodbye-google.html (aka "41 shades of blue").