The scope of the experiment is so narrow that I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on this, unless I was making a cheaply-designed, SEO-driven, diet-pill selling website. Even then, the difference could be attributed to poor design (irrespective of width).
Thin Websites Sell More
11–14 of 14 posts
Re: Thin Websites Sell More
#12The scope of the experiment is so narrow that I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on this, unless I was making a cheaply-designed, SEO-driven, diet-pill selling website. Even then, the difference could be attributed to poor design (irrespective of width).
Dood, thank you for the kind words.
It's been working (big time) for us ever since we switched all landing pages to a "thin" design.
And no, we don't promote a cheaply-designed diet-pill website. SEO-driven, yes. Money-making, yes.
Re: Thin Websites Sell More
#13The scope of the experiment is so narrow that I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on this, unless I was making a cheaply-designed, SEO-driven, diet-pill selling website. Even then, the difference could be attributed to poor design (irrespective of width).
Dood, thank you for the kind words. It's been working (big time) for us ever since we switched all landing pages to a "thin" design. And no, we don't promote a cheaply-designed diet-pill website. SEO-driven, yes. Money-making, yes.
I wouldn't worry too much about people whose "about" page consists of:
"Just zis guy, you know"
Re: Thin Websites Sell More
#14The scope of the experiment is so narrow that I wouldn't draw any conclusions based on this, unless I was making a cheaply-designed, SEO-driven, diet-pill selling website. Even then, the difference could be attributed to poor design (irrespective of width).
Dood, thank you for the kind words. It's been working (big time) for us ever since we switched all landing pages to a "thin" design. And no, we don't promote a cheaply-designed diet-pill website. SEO-driven, yes. Money-making, yes.
Sorry if I came across as overly critical - I wasn't suggesting that your conclusion is invalid, but that the experiment would only apply to a fairly narrow class of website (e.g. "mortgage-leads... business-leads... diet-pills... and ringtones"), and that you may not have varied the design significantly (screenshots would have been great!). The 'cheaply-designed' thing was uncalled for, and for which I apologise; I think I was trying to suggest that a different 1024 design style may make a big difference, but it came out snarky, probably because I'm working on something frustrating.