Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

#81

Post by zach »

btilly wrote: post #48
SRSimko wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read something similar about Starbucks. Their approach is or was to be located next to a dry cleaner or movie rental business (when they existed). The thought was that people have to go to those stores twice to drop-off and pick-up and they thought it increased the chances that people would stop in for a coffee.

I read something else similar involving Starbucks. Apparently other coffee chains have taken the strategy of building next to Starbucks. The thinking is to let Starbucks pay for marketing, then when the lines are long at Starbucks, people will try the rival instead. Some will prefer it, and so a customer is born.

Jamba Juice is a well-known example of the "just build next to a Starbucks" philosophy... even when Starbucks weren't everywhere.

Re: Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

#82

Post by nrb »

andreasklinger wrote: post #70
rumpelstiltskin wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a really good looking site. Any reason why the layout isn't centered?

thanks for the feedback. we believe it is better left aligned. a lot of small layout reasons to sum up an strong opinion.

I agree, if you center the container it looks really off-center once you get past those top-right blocks. Left aligned looks great.

Re: Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

#83

Post by primigenus »

jdietrich wrote: post #27

The important stuff in the common design pattern has been tested to death - everyone who matters is using clicktracking, a/b/x testing and deep user analytics. The reason they all look the same is the same reason that all infomercials or porn sites use the same basic structure - that's what testing indicates will convert best. Some people know this empirically, some are just blindly aping the fashion, but there is wa…

I actually wrote a blog post about this a while ago, called "imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" (http://goo.gl/K4RY) because I was hearing people complain that the site I was designing was too "similar" to other sites, specifically 37signals' product marketing sites. But who cares? They're good design patterns. You have to start somewhere.

And aside from that, building a promotional site is hard: http://goo.gl/8OlP. There's a lot of work there that's hard for a programmer to predict in advance, given that programmers generally haven't done things like think about how to market their product to an underserved niche. Tongue somewhat in cheek.

Re: Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

#84

Post by tel »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #50
jdietrich wrote: post #27

The important stuff in the common design pattern has been tested to death - everyone who matters is using clicktracking, a/b/x testing and deep user analytics. The reason they all look the same is the same reason that all infomercials or porn sites use the same basic structure - that's what testing indicates will convert best. Some people know this empirically, some are just blindly aping the fashion, but there is wa…

You can only a/b test what you have come up with in the first place. This is not convergence on the optimum. It's just slightly optimized fashion.

Bingo! And who isn't today immune to infomercials? Or better yet, who doesn't unconsciously avoid big, shiny graphics with the belief that they're banner ads? (I know I do)

The point being that unified design will pick up a unified brand. The original poster is noticing the Young Startup brand, I suppose. In time this brand will become associated withall young startups and the enotional aftertaste will dominate a/b tested behaviors.

Thus the virtue of being innovative in design. Ita not going to (necessarily) lose on a/b testing and it'll help you to avoid brand unification.

Re: Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

#85

Post by josefresco »

It's an evolution of the post web 2.0/37 signals design era. Or as I call it the 1-3-1 design style. I can't believe people are already forgetting this and the youngsters are growing up without knowing it.

And don't waste our time with the old "A/B tested: BS. Not many startups actually do A/B testing. They just read a few articles written by other famous startup founders who did do the real work and/or tech bloggers who report on said work and apply the findings to their own sites.

My advice; look beyond the (now aging and classic) 1-3-1 and develop your own style. Of course this would require having a real designer involved at your startup which some founders miss when looking for engineering staff.

Re: Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

#86

Post by josefresco »

benpixel wrote: post #8
michaelfairley wrote: post #7

~940px is close to the safest assumption you can make of the minimum horizontal resolution for an average user.

Scrollbar takes only about 20 pixels, if we are taking about minimum height of 1024px, that means you can go up to 990px, 960px or so.

1000 actually works quite well with no horizontal scrollbars. And for most local small business sites there are more visitors above 1024 than below.

Re: Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

#87

Post by josefresco »

alastair wrote: post #4

I always thought it was people borrowing from 37signals. I don't really have a problem with it, looks good enough and if the product works who cares.

Yahtzee! Who would have thought buried way down at the bottom of the thread we'd have someone stumble upon part of the right answer. Thank you alastair, you must be old like me.

Re: Ask HN: All startup websites look the same

#88

Post by josefresco »

retube wrote: post #24

I always thought they looked the same as they all built on Ruby-on-Rails, which (presumably - I don't know, never done any RoR dev) has a lot of standard pluggable templates & themes.

Ooo! A swing and a miss. I'll call it a good solid foul ball.

The RoR connection is from 37signals which had something to do with this design trend (but not all).

Post reply on HN