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

Web 2.0 Can Be Dangerous...

useit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–15 of 15 posts

Re: Web 2.0 Can Be Dangerous...

#11

Post by rms »

some wrote: post #10
pg wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was going to say that his site seems surprisingly badly designed for a usability expert. The jittery typography makes it exhausting to read. And yet maybe it does appeal to some people. Or rather, work on them. There may be a reason all those sites with PROVEN techniques for generating a six figure income all look so similar. http://www.leemarketinggroup.com/page/page/5189275.htm

I love the design of useit.com. To me its one of the best designed websites out there. By far. I hate most websites. I also like Hacker News. So im surprised to see you disliking useit. Jittery typography? What would be better? One giant block of uniform text? How would you design useit?

See the way essays are presented on paulgraham.com. The limited line width makes it very readable -- if useit.com was reformatted this way, the enormous amount of text would be overwhelming. The main problem with useit is that the way it is presented encourages you to not actually read it. To me, this indicates that there is something wrong with the information, or at least it should be a lot shorter.

Re: Web 2.0 Can Be Dangerous...

#12

Post by brlewis »

dangrover wrote: post #3

While he makes some good points, he also makes some hasty generalizations. You could just as easily have a complicated, poorly designed interface with or without AJAX being involved.

From the article: "Unlike some older technologies (notably, Flash and PDF), Web 2.0 ideas are not inherently bad for users. They can be highly effective; we sometimes see examples of usability-enhancing Web 2.0 designs in our studies."

Re: Web 2.0 Can Be Dangerous...

#13

Post by jkush »

pg wrote: post #7
henning wrote: post #4

I hate his excessive use of bold. It's like he's encouraging skimming and he doesn't even want people to read carefully. I always feel like a chump when my eyes wander.

I was going to say that his site seems surprisingly badly designed for a usability expert. The jittery typography makes it exhausting to read. And yet maybe it does appeal to some people. Or rather, work on them. There may be a reason all those sites with PROVEN techniques for generating a six figure income all look so similar. http://www.leemarketinggroup.com/page/page/5189275.htm

Ugh, I really detest those sites. They're obviously scams and it bothers me to no end that someone would actually fall for it.

Re: Web 2.0 Can Be Dangerous...

#14

Post by mechanical_fish »

henning wrote: post #4

I hate his excessive use of bold. It's like he's encouraging skimming and he doesn't even want people to read carefully. I always feel like a chump when my eyes wander.

What the site needs is a de-boldify button that takes the bold away. Only veteran users would ever find such a thing, but those are the users that are most likely to want to read every single word of Nielsen's peerless prose, anyway.

Looks like it's a simple matter of adding:

    .maintext strong {
       font-weight: normal;
    }
to the page CSS. Any Greasemonkey hackers in the house?

Of course, once you press the button you are committing to actually reading the whole article. Don't blame me if you find that you unconsciously preferred the skimmable version.

Re: Web 2.0 Can Be Dangerous...

#15

Post by pchristensen »

rms wrote: post #11
some wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love the design of useit.com. To me its one of the best designed websites out there. By far. I hate most websites. I also like Hacker News. So im surprised to see you disliking useit. Jittery typography? What would be better? One giant block of uniform text? How would you design useit?

See the way essays are presented on paulgraham.com. The limited line width makes it very readable -- if useit.com was reformatted this way, the enormous amount of text would be overwhelming. The main problem with useit is that the way it is presented encourages you to not actually read it. To me, this indicates that there is something wrong with the information, or at least it should be a lot shorter.

He's writing to two audiences at the same time but favoring one over the other. The bold, etc makes it hard for readers to read, but since they are readers, they'll read anyway. If they can't read it, at least they'll skim.

He's writing for the skimmers, which happen to be some very large percentage of web users. But these articles are mainly just loss leaders for his books, full reports, and conferences, which are all media where people give full attention by design.

Post reply on HN