Live data from Hacker News

Your website is not for you

websmith.studio

11–20 of 207 posts

Re: Your website is not for you

#11
A website is a compromise between three parties.

User: I want to get the information I came for.

Business: I want to build brand trust and drive conversion.

Internal organization: I want the owner’s taste and preferences to be reflected.

The article strongly says that a website is for the user. I agree with the spirit of that argument, but in practice, most users’ “taste” is shaped by brand reputation.

And where does brand reputation come from? Often, it comes from the owner’s taste, positioning, and accumulated decisions.

A SaaS landing page is not only a place where users get information. From the company’s perspective, it is also a tool for imprinting the company’s positioning in the user’s mind.

I think this phenomenon is essentially a principal-agent problem.

In real client work, most clients are not thinking about UX. They are thinking about the owner’s experience — OX, so to speak. And in practice, most companies operate based on OX.

In the ideal story, everyone says they care about UX. But most businesses do not actually run on UX. They run on OX.

The key question is whether the owner’s taste happens to align with the public’s taste.

Re: Your website is not for you

#12
When I first read the title, my reaction was: how dare they say my website isn't for me? Of course it is. It's my space to share thoughts, jot down notes from things I come across, publish small tools, and so on. That made me click through and see how the article could possibly argue otherwise.

Then I realised that the article talks about business websites, not personal websites. Quoting from the article:

> The website isn't for the founder, the marketing manager, or the board. It's for the person you've never met - the customer weighing up a purchase, the lead chasing a phone number, the visitor sizing up your credibility or the member signing up to access gated content.

Yes, I agree. While not really a business, I've always liked https://nhs.uk/ for its simplicity. I especially like the A-Z section where we can find details about a large number of medical conditions. Among actual businesses (small ones particularly) I like https://buttondown.com/ and https://kagi.com/ quite a bit.

That said (and this is off-topic for this article), the part of the web I enjoy most is where your website is indeed for you, the small web of personal websites. That part of the web was an important part of me growing up from my late teens into adulthood and it remains the part I enjoy most even now. I want this part of the web to remain healthy and vibrant for as long as possible.

Re: Your website is not for you

#14
This applies to pretty much every situation. It is not just about visual things, it is more about things that are easy to have an opinion on. Its similar concept to bike shedding, but with the added emphasis of the decision maker. Though the very fact we even call them that kind of implies that they should have a say right? I guess we object to the kind of say that they have. Should a decision maker just make binary decisions? Yes to this, no to that.

Re: Your website is not for you

#15
I have felt this a lot when designing the landing page for my SQL canvas side project. _I_ really want to write about DuckDB WASM, pre-signed URLs and how cool Cloudflare's durable objects are.

But my target audience are data analysts, and they just want to analyze some data!

I have gone through a lot of design revisions because I have a hard time containing my technical excitement. I was surprised how hard communicating a product clearly is.

As a backend/data person I was on the high horse thinking that designers jobs are so much easier than distributed systems. Now I feel the opposite!

Re: Your website is not for you

#19

This writing was effective, clear, to the point, and revealed a human perspective. I can sense the frustrated professional going behind the curtain and tidying up his reservations about dealing with his clients. It was refreshing to read in exactly the way AI slop isn’t.

[deleted]

Re: Your website is not for you

#20
post #11

A website is a compromise between three parties. User: I want to get the information I came for. Business: I want to build brand trust and drive conversion. Internal organization: I want the owner’s taste and preferences to be reflected. The article strongly says that a website is for the user. I agree with the spirit of that argument, but in practice, most users’ “taste” is shaped by brand reputation. And where does…

Why do people pay so much money for reports from dubious firms like Gartner?

The game they are playing is almost like a coin toss. If you look at the Gartner reports that become publicly visible, they are often wrong.

So why do reports from companies like Gartner still sell?

Because they reduce the anxiety of the owner or decision-maker.

Business is complex. Even a bad product can succeed because of advertising. Exaggerated marketing, fraud, timing, distribution, and luck all exist, and they can all produce success. UX is an ideal. But in practice, developers often have to satisfy OX: owner experience.

Companies appear to pursue profit because most owners like money. But in reality, many companies are closer to the realization of the owner’s ideology, taste, and worldview.

So what matters?

For a developer, it becomes important to judge how closely the owner’s taste aligns with the public, and with the target audience. That is why developers often end up flattering the owner: not merely because of hierarchy, but because the owner’s taste is frequently the actual operating system of the business.

Post reply on HN