English | EN Better be ugly to be successful on the Internet
Jan 21, 2014
The observation is pretty simple, if you look at websites like Google, Ebay, Amazon, Zappos, Facebook,Graiglist, leboncoin(the French version of Craiglist) : they all have two or three points in common. First of all, they are driving a ton of traffic. Secondly, they are making a lot of money, more or less ranking in the top ten of revenue generating commercial websites. And lastly, they are Ugly ; their design is basic,nothing fancy.
Does it mean that ugly websites are better? I don’t know about that, and I pretty much don’t mind.
What is most important in these websites? In less than three interactions (click, enter text…) I get the information I want!!! How many websites from 500 fortune companies are out there, are very nice (design-wise), but just a nightmare to get the information you need ? And once you get it you even don’t know how to replicate the process again. (My issue yesterday when booking a flight).
It sounds easy to do a functional website that allows direct access to information but with limited interaction. That statement was probably true 15 years ago when technologies were more limited, but now that the display layer technology has a lot of capability, web designers seem to have forgotten about the usability of their website, as well as the stability of their backend, instead focusing on the fancy design.
If we go deeper with the analysis, any company who wants to have an ecommerce website and engage with customers online should not forget about the basis of design: Eye-tracking, heat map, Fitt’s law.
In conclusion, be ugly, but be smart, and don’t be afraid to test your website and make some changes based on your audience’s behavior (e.g., cultural reading habits impact the way end users interact with your website).
About the author
