61–70 of 445 posts
"I wrote these words, and you're reading them"... and Google knows you're reading them. I find it a bit ironical that a manifesto for minimalism still carries Google Analytics code to track people.
I don't see the connection, or the problem. Please explain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Only 4KB!
It made me look - the front page of HN is currently 7.8KB, and this is: - 1.6% of yahoo.com size (477KB) - 18.9% of reddit.com size (41.2 KB) - 23.6% of stackoverflow.com size (33KB) and - 108.3% of gmail.com size (7.2KB) - 520% of google.com size (1.5KB) - 866.6% of your blog post size (908B) so this gives some perspective. edit: the most surprising is gmail.com for me, id have thought they load tons of js in the ba…
Also, often a great picture is greater than many words. And the web is equally powerful for that.
Sure, that page is just text. But I found it via hackernews. If hackernews looked like that, I wouldn't visit it every day.
A lot of people (below) have commented that they like HN because it is just text and links on a page.
This was a bit of an obsession of mine ever since I saw Coding Horror a few years ago. I had seen a lot of extremely minimalist designs, but they were all doing things to accomplish that minimalism. As a developer though, you have a nagging feeling in the back of your brain saying "that's a lie, it's not simple, it's very complicated, it just looks simple." Coding Horror is complex, but it was plain enough for me to…
No. YouTube comments are words. They're also terrible. Also, images can be as powerful (or more so) than words.
IMO his thesis would be better stated as:
"But the most powerful tool on the web is still a compelling piece of content (words, image, video)"
The web is also expanding every day to include more capabilities.
It is about way more than words. Let's not oversimplify it just because we think minimalism is cute.
No.
The web is not just a place for text / words, that is not its heart and soul, and therefore neither is that the case for web design. It really never has been. I see no great argument in favor of words being the core over any other form of expression. Today's bandwidth more than allows for beautiful video, animation, high quality graphics and photos, etc. Or low key graphics, subtle interactivity, and so on. It's absurd to argue that such a rich medium should always be focused on words.
Text does not have to be the focus. It depends on what the purpose to be achieved is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We run into trouble when we adopt some sort of "minimalism, always, ever, for everything" dogma. Evidence? Examples?
Is it not self-obvious that if every page attempting to serve up content similar to that in the OP (pictureless editorial), the web would be bleak and characterless? Not debating the effectiveness of that kind of design, but rather pointing out the obviousness that this sort of anti-"always, ever" statement is easily validated.
I HATE the way web design has evolved. I want to make the design choices at my end, not have them imposed on me or consuming a ridiculous amount of bandwidth. Most of the design on the web is no good.