

Facebook facelift - prabodh
http://www.behance.net/Gallery/Facebook-Facelift-Home-Profiles-_amp-Publisher/314489

======
akamaka
They haven't added any fundamental innovations that Facebook hasn't already
implemented.

This is an example of the worst kind of design, where the designer has gone
through a self-absorbed process of moving around and resizing elements that
Facebook created through years of experience with real users.

~~~
texec
Can absolutely confirm that. For me it looks like something that is designed
by Microsoft (mainly because of the fonts).

There are too wide spaces between text and metadata, too lwo contrasts between
light shades of grey and a disrupted context for some elements (see My Profile
and Search).

#fail

~~~
potatolicious
To add to your point, these guys have no idea what the average computer user
is running. Hint: it's not a pro-grade 30" widescreen LCD.

Where I work we run a website targeted to everyone - mom, pop, grandpa,
college dude, etc. Suffice to say, our minimum resolution and colour depth
requirements are _really low_. Experience has proven this to be far wiser than
Web 2.0-ing everything and assuming people have screen real estate.

The design here won't work on low resolution displays. The news feed would -
but that's only because their design wastes a truckload of space down the
middle. Their photo viewer, and calendar will break on any low-resolution
screen.

Can it be fixed? Sure, but I have a feeling the more you "fix" their design,
the closer you're going to get to where Facebook already is today ;)

------
unalone
Too light. Not enough contrast/information density. I like some of the things,
like the photo display, but this makes Facebook look generic and cluttered and
"trendy". The best thing about Facebook's design is it so thoroughly denies
trends.

EDIT: Also, the lack of pointless gradients.

~~~
kyro
It's just that one gradient in the background.

I agree with your overall sentiment, though. You know, often times, I find
sites designed like that really uncomfortable to use. I can't explain why.
Everything is too nice, and too slick. Maybe it's like taking a friend's
ferrari out for a spin and being afraid to get it scratched - not sure.

~~~
izaidi
I agree. A lot of designers excel at making things that are nice to look at
but not especially nice to _use._ I've always thought of this as a sort of
"heaviness" -- the design has so much inertia that you're reluctant to
manipulate it. This Facebook makeover, with its non-standard fonts and
metallic sheen, feels really heavy.

~~~
GBKS
That's usually a matter of a broken design process. Design really needs to
start with figuring out what the content is and design decisions need to be
based on content and function requirements.

Too many times, I see a designer use stock images and "lorem ipsum" text,
which leads to a design that looks good, but once it's built it won't feel
right.

The same goes for this Facebook redesign. The most important content of the
feed pages (people's status updates) is de-emphasiced (light grey) and really
small. Functional items are also grey and uppercase, which makes them hard to
read. Etc, etc.

I still appreciate the effort and thought that goes into it. They should do a
few rounds of feedback/iteration and this could be very cool.

~~~
potatolicious
I have an easier explanation: they're not closing the feedback loop. The
problem here is that they've designed this thing in-place, without the benefit
of having Facebook's reams of trends and existing user data - nor have they
been able to test each of their assumptions in the real world.

Designing without a feedback loop will make very pretty products on paper that
utterly fail in real life.

------
prabodh
Wonder how different perspectives designers and hackers have...But it is not
definitely a great design and it gonna look worse on a small screen...

------
snprbob86
I quite like what they are doing with <http://lite.facebook.com>

------
nsfx
It's funny we all share a similar view on ycombinator.com (the 'facelift' is
nothing special), yet everyone on the source page is orgasming over it.

== critical thinkers vs. autofellating designers

~~~
potatolicious
To be honest, claiming that the HN community are critical thinkers and
designers are autofellating... is pretty autofellating.

I would like a more rational, more realistic explanation of why we seem to
universally hate it, while designers seem to love it.

