Live data from Hacker News

Your website is not for you

websmith.studio

91–100 of 207 posts

Re: Your website is not for you

#91

The only problem with this analysis is that in practice a lot of the designers don't understand the customer and don't understand the business. Don't understand the market, at least compared to the founders or people who've been in the space for a long time. So there's a bit of a false confidence where the designers think they know what's really right because they did "scientific approach". But in reality the founder…

I tend to agree with this.

It's hard to build something great if you don't know the customer. It's hard to know the customer if you don't get opportunities to understand their pain, or just don't care.

Re: Your website is not for you

#92

My website is absolutely for me. Anyone who wants to visit is welcome though, I put it online for a reason. (You're also free to move along for that matter, that's up to you.) The article states "A website isn't art". This product mindset fundamentally makes the web a boring place. I would personally welcome all websites that are art.

One distinction the author didn't make was personal sites vs product / services sites. My personal site is for me, but the site for my SaaS app? That's for my customers.

Re: Your website is not for you

#94
post #82

The only problem with this analysis is that in practice a lot of the designers don't understand the customer and don't understand the business. Don't understand the market, at least compared to the founders or people who've been in the space for a long time. So there's a bit of a false confidence where the designers think they know what's really right because they did "scientific approach". But in reality the founder…

And when the CEO says "Hey, we really need to make our contact information more visible because I get a lot of customer reports that they can't figure out how to contact us", sure. When the founders say they want the picture bigger and the logo a bit more purple and can we add underlines to all the menu items and also bold them, probably not. Which one is more common?

[dead]

Re: Your website is not for you

#95

The only problem with this analysis is that in practice a lot of the designers don't understand the customer and don't understand the business. Don't understand the market, at least compared to the founders or people who've been in the space for a long time. So there's a bit of a false confidence where the designers think they know what's really right because they did "scientific approach". But in reality the founder…

I see it with new hires in our company. We are small SaaS app.

Starry eyed business person thinks he can tell us whatever there is about making websites because our landing page is basically neglected.

Business we are in B2B and this specific product is not getting customers this way.

We get customers via CEO or business partners connections.

All the “organic traffic” is waste of time for us because when they hear the price of product they never call again.

Having a lot of small customers is not our business model because our app is not for small businesses.

Re: Your website is not for you

#97

“A website isn't art. It's a tool with one job: get the user to do the thing they came for.” Eh, I don’t think this is accurate. A website does serve utility, but if you remove art from the discussion, then it becomes soulless, which is not the world we want to live in. Take HN for example. The first time I visited, I thought it was a terrible, dated design. But over time I grew to appreciate it. I think it is, in fa…

I guess in a world filled with heavy, modern, nauseating design, being fast and simple can be a statement. But I don't think websites meant to be used should be art or statements.

Re: Your website is not for you

#98
post #80

Sorry to be frank and for the upcoming rant as your site is mostly fine, but looking at most websites I visite these days be it from a company, a service, a webshop, an open source project, a forum, a blog, a newspaper or almost any form of social media. I'd say I do not know for whom anyone is designing those sites, but I can clearly say it is not for me (as a human user and/or customer). The websites with the best…

> The websites with the best UX I know are mostly those who haven't really changed for the past 20 years. > I might be crazy but assume to not be alone in this one, as I have yet to finde someone who likes their back button being hijacked. Likes being blasted by an autoplay video on max volume. Likes seeing the UI reorganized almost every other month. Likes seeing constantly moving and/or blinking elements on a mostl…

It seems that websites keep finding ways around my autoplay blocking settings. Back button hijacks I haven't seen in a while I don't think, but I feel the sentiment.

Re: Your website is not for you

#99
post #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. Exag…

This, so much.

I'm the IT Director of a medium sized (for our industry) company. Some years ago I worked with an amazing free-lance developer, and our then-director of marketing, to build a custom website that we were pretty proud of. A year ago our new marketing director paid mid-five figures to move to one of the site-builder services because 1.) the old CMS back-end to update content was "too technical", and the hours / a day wait for me or the developer to do it instead was too long, 2.) marketing didn't have direct control over design elements, and our questions like "do you want all of the buttons changed to match this style?", or "we use drop-downs on these other similar forms, should we use that here, too?" were... impertinent, I guess?

The mistake we made, which you beautifully articulate, was paying insufficient attention to the Owner Experience. The old CMS was functional, but it was ugly; the previous marketing director didn't care about back-end looks, and didn't want to put resources into making it look pretty. I should have recognized that that priority had changed. We also could have made them a form-builder + page-builder of some kind, with a way to directly edit templates. Whatever it took, we should have made the old system more satisfying to its new "owner" - and I should have put that expense into the IT budget, rather than have expected it to come out of theirs. That would have better for the company. Live and learn.

All that apart, not being responsible for the website is great: it's nice not to deal with text editing and image updates. I said my piece about the advantages of a custom site, and was heard and overruled, and that's fine. I made sure I am not an owner of the new site; they have their playground, and are welcome to it.

UX is, of course, degenerating, and marketing are (predictably; I predicted it) starting to chafe against the limitations of this company's product. I expect we'll move back to a custom site in a few years. But, what they've got is for now a better Owner Experience, which for them is worth the many multiples of cost, and the current functionality shortcomings.

I expect next go-around they'll want to pay some big design agency for a custom site; it'll probably be six figures. I don't know how I should approach that discussion. Any ideas?

Re: Your website is not for you

#100
Very true. I did over 300 product marketing website reviews and the most common thing I would see is a generic description of this big aspirational vision of the company and none of the specifics of what a company actually does. If you’re into see what great websites do the YouTube playlist with the top sites is at http://goatedguild.com
Post reply on HN