

You Aren't Google or Apple (so don't design your home page like theirs) - kadavy
http://blog.kadavy-inc.com/post/227263869/you-arent-google-or-apple

======
monocasa
I totally disagree with the point of this article. It's (fairly) easy to add
features until you're UI is cluttered. The hard part is making the decision
between what features need to be added and which detract from your final
presentation. In most cases, I've found that the right balance finds itself
closer to minimalism than not.

~~~
NathanKP
All website designers should read Apple's UI design guidelines. The idea is
simple: the main operation of the website or application, or whatever else it
is, should be visible and prominent. Other extra features can be built-in such
that users eventually find them one by one like easter eggs or pleasant
surprises.

Slamming them with row after row of buttons and boxes is disconcerting. For a
new company I would say that simple is best, as long as it is elegant
simplicity.

Asceticism is a whole different story. Your page should have just the right
amount of appeal without being loaded down. I feel that Google, Apple, and
others have mastered this fine balance, and that is perhaps the reason why it
is better for new companies and startups to not try to imitate it, at least
not right away. It is a hard thing to master because if it isn't done properly
it will ruin the effect.

However, if a startup can pull it off right it will be much more successful
then a similar complicated interface.

~~~
kadavy
Great suggestion - I've read some of their UI guidelines, but I'll have to
check out more.

I don't know what the specific language you're referring to is, but I do
imagine an issue with expressing "the main operation of the website or
application" too prominently in something like a marketplace. Imagine if eBay
or Amazon tried using a huge splash that took up the entire area above the
fold to explain what they were about.

I guess you could argue that in a marketplace type of site, the "main
operation of the website" is expressed through displaying all of the various
items for sale; but that's not the type of design that would come from the
thought process this article warns against. PS not saying that's what you're
implying, just observing.

------
andyangelos
The "why and not the what" is an important consideration, especially for
incorporating design elements from Google. If your site's primary benefit is
the ability to quickly access information - a simple search box makes more
sense than attempting to organize categories in another fashion (you spoke of
the conditioning in search). When Twitter switched their homepage to something
reminiscent of Google, I understood, I accepted and periodically use.

~~~
kadavy
Oh, you use the Twitter home page? You have to sign out to use that, right? Is
it that valuable?

~~~
andyangelos
I use _periodically_ when I am logged into CoTweet or TweetDeck and they are
buried. Also, think the homepage has value for first time users (yes, they
still exist) to understand how the site functions. Type in a topic and
understand "Oh, people share short comments and I can get different
information on topics than Google would provide." So yes, that can be
valuable.

~~~
kadavy
Oh, totally see how it provides value for new users.

------
kevinholesh
I don't see what's wrong with showing off your product on your homepage. Even
if you have a service, have a sexy screenshot and say why it will benefit the
viewer ("It will increase your conversion rate by 5%" or "Improve your
customer service by being responsive").

It probably isn't as sexy as an Apple computer, but that doesn't mean you
should feel the need to hide it.

------
ziadbc
The battle is often over familiar vs. intuitive designs. Creating a new design
paradigm that is intuitive is much more difficult that presenting a user with
a design they are familiar with. Most web design seems to follow the path of
least resistance. It also suffers from the question of is this graphic design,
or is it interface? Real life metrics have stole the thunder of 'pretty'
designs.

