These pages look fine. I'm not seeing the problem. Most landing pages don't need to be creative statements; in fact, I'd wager the majority are hurt by creativity; real creativity is risky! Which of these applications want an artistic statement on their brochure pages?

▲

xkcd-sucks an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Brand differentiation, not art

	▲	tptacek an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Quick, pull up VictoriaMetrics.com and Honeycomb.io. Tell me how the design differentiates the brands. Sell me on the idea that anybody picks one over the other based on these web designs.

▲

Barrin92 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>I'd wager the majority are hurt by creativity; real creativity is risky!

yes, and who wants creativity and risk when everything can look like the interior of a McDonalds. I'd much rather look at someone's terrible and scuffed attempt at designing their own page, because it at least signals that there is a human who isn't afraid to try something out rather than the Instagram filter version of a webpage.

▲

tptacek an hour ago | parent | next [-]

There are times and places where I want to see a lot of humanity and imperfection in transactions, and there are times I don't. You're dunking using McDonalds as an example, but there's a reason they all look like that, and it's one of the most successful businesses in the world.

If you're building the application equivalent of JP Graziano or La Chaparrita Taqueria, make it human, scuffed up even. I'd like JP Graziano less if it looked like a Cheesecake Factory. Right there with you. But if you're building a tool, for developers, one that will mostly be used to conduct some kind of business? Boring competence wins hands down. Users and customers are scouting for competence. Most of the time, their antennae are not in fact up for individual artistic expression.

▲

Barrin92 an hour ago | parent [-]

> Boring competence wins hands down. Users and customers are scouting for competence. Most of the time, their antennae are not in fact up for individual artistic expression.

but even that doesn't really hold any more. The great slopification has made it so that people don't even associate that kind of thing with reliability. Instead it's gotten a kind of ca the year 2000 "thing out of a Chinese factory" vibe to it. Even on practical grounds you might as well give it your own shot now because that stuff is poisoned.

As a concrete example, if you wanted to make a Github competitor ten years ago you tried to look like Github, now you're better off trying to look like sourcehut or codeberg because you don't look like the thing that dies every five minutes.

	▲	tptacek an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It's not my argument that competent web design is a reliable signal, only that nobody is looking for incompetent design when they're shopping for a used Camry or a new rotary sander. When Stripe or Braintree or Paypal deliberately mess up their designs so they can signal their humanity to customers, I'll check back in with this idea. Maybe companies will start introducing dumb bugs into their code, too, because if it's too perfect everybody will know a robot wrote it.

▲

emodendroket an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Everyone says that but in aggregate they don't act like they believe it. Having "personality" means some people will love it and others will hate it, rather than everyone finding it acceptable and moving on to the actual content.