Skip to main content
edited tags
Link
Yisela
  • 26.5k
  • 11
  • 75
  • 122
Tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackDesign/status/456391975562801152
edited body
Source Link

I notice that sites and software with less superficial value (less style, inspiration, or simply "neat-ness") often succeed far above their fantastically, well-designed counterparts.

Is the style, creativity, & inspiration side of interface design not equally important compared to the content, efficiency, & productivity side of interface development?


In other words, if the buttons are where they should be and I can understand everything that's going on, is it not important to focus on additional fancy style?

Examples:


Reddit vs Digg

Reddit:

enter image description here

Known globally to look terrible, used monthly by 112 million unique users.

Digg:

enter image description here

Looks great, used monthly by 20 million unique users.

Windows 7 vs OSX

Windows 7:

enter image description hereenter image description here

Looks alright, but known more for efficiency and compatibility than beautiful, smooth design. 500 million licenses sold.

OSX:

enter image description hereenter image description here

Looks fantastic, performs and interacts smoothly, but 'natively' incompatible with most of the world's desktop software. 50 million copies sold.

I notice that sites and software with less superficial value (less style, inspiration, or simply "neat-ness") often succeed far above their fantastically, well-designed counterparts.

Is the style, creativity, & inspiration side of interface design not equally important compared to the content, efficiency, & productivity side of interface development?


In other words, if the buttons are where they should be and I can understand everything that's going on, is it not important to focus on additional fancy style?

Examples:


Reddit vs Digg

Reddit:

enter image description here

Known globally to look terrible, used monthly by 112 million unique users.

Digg:

enter image description here

Looks great, used monthly by 20 million unique users.

Windows 7 vs OSX

Windows 7:

enter image description here

Looks alright, but known more for efficiency and compatibility than beautiful, smooth design. 500 million licenses sold.

OSX:

enter image description here

Looks fantastic, performs and interacts smoothly, but 'natively' incompatible with most of the world's desktop software. 50 million copies sold.

I notice that sites and software with less superficial value (less style, inspiration, or simply "neat-ness") often succeed far above their fantastically, well-designed counterparts.

Is the style, creativity, & inspiration side of interface design not equally important compared to the content, efficiency, & productivity side of interface development?


In other words, if the buttons are where they should be and I can understand everything that's going on, is it not important to focus on additional fancy style?

Examples:


Reddit vs Digg

Reddit:

enter image description here

Known globally to look terrible, used monthly by 112 million unique users.

Digg:

enter image description here

Looks great, used monthly by 20 million unique users.

Windows 7 vs OSX

Windows 7:

enter image description here

Looks alright, but known more for efficiency and compatibility than beautiful, smooth design. 500 million licenses sold.

OSX:

enter image description here

Looks fantastic, performs and interacts smoothly, but 'natively' incompatible with most of the world's desktop software. 50 million copies sold.

edited tags
Link
Source Link
Loading