What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
$45 & up: Huge Hotel Sale view!
travelzoo.com - Great discounts on rooms for the holidays and beyond!
63 Comments
- Blabster, on 10/12/2007, -2/+45Site Mirror :
http://i17.tinypic.com/2iavsd3.png - Dantetheinferno, on 10/12/2007, -5/+35Ya, it's not like someone didn't know this before...
nope... Not www.google.com... Nope. - milk93rd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+23I guess there's not much simpler than a blank page when it goes down within nine minutes
- Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Next Article -
Bandwidth: Why it's so Important! - manitoba98xp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14@bloc
A variety of tools....from Mac apps like Paparazzi to Firefox extensions like Pearl Crescent Page Saver (there's another one, but its name escapes me atm). Or you could do it the old-fashioned way: stitching screenshots. But you knew that, right? - Bradly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Although I agree with the message of simplicity, this article is poorly written and the points even less well formulated.
- tozmervo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Simplicity is *not* easier to design. If it was, crappy web design would never have been an issue in the first place. People tend to try and cover up bad design by continuously adding stuff, fixing things that should have never been included in the first place and then adding fixes for their fixes. Just look at any bad piece of architecture, product design, or even certain operating systems for examples.
- cbergeron, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Gee...
Upcoming News:
Sex: Why it's so popular!
bured for obviousness. - piratearggghhh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Cliff's Notes
1. They help in getting users to stay longer.
2. They’re generally much easier to code, and design for that matter.
3. They let the user focus on content.
4. They load faster.
5. They cater to the largest possible audience.
6. I like them more! - parax, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Simplicity is good? If only someone had realized that decades ago. We could end up with these nice readables neatly divided into columns on paper with big fonts to signify the title of articles. They could report news or something. I'm not sure what we'll call such an invention, but now that we understand simplicity is good, I'm sure someone will name it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+10KISS
- kurotenshi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7The article was too simplistic...ironically enough. Use the points you made and elaborate on them by showing techniques, web standards and sites that exemplify your approach. It is one thing to say that simplicity works, it is quite another to back it up. One of the most god awful sites on this freaking planet - myspace - has so much display density that I'm amazed that users are able to comprehend half of what they are doing when they visit it. While I agree with the points that you make, there is nothing new there that the web 2.0 trendwhores haven't banged out in the past year. With that being said, design does evolve, and I believe that simplicity is an important factor in that evolution - but how much of a factor is the question...my 2 cents. ;)
- covert215, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9http://duggmirror.com/design/Simplicity_Why_it_s_so_popular/
- Nick22, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Its ok, we will do what you ask. We won't spare you.
- wphj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Keep It Simple Stupid
- BigSlacker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5It's only simplicity for the user. The ratio of simple to capability is directly proportional to the skill level and time that went into development. If I design something almost anyone can pop in and use with little to no training, I feel like I've accomplished something. It usually involves several iterations of trash and start over.
- Carlsen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Less is more.
- anagoge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I disagree. Simplicity does indeed work great and yes, content is important, but any good designer should be able to deliver that content in a visually appealing manner. A manner that gets the information to the viewer, but gives the viewer something to look at, other than the text. One too many designers use the "Simplicity is better" excuse because they're not capable of designing something more complex.
- Bloc, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11nice mirror! can anyone tell me how to make these full page screenshots?
- TNHitokiri, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Its because the audience has seen it all. I mean, who gives a ***** how nice it looks.
We aren't browsing the web looking for art; we want some damn information! - ttfadia, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Good article except the figure for average time spent on a page seems a bit high. Obviously, the figure varies for different websites and content types, but it is typically far less than a minute...single digits are not uncommon.
- lukestylewalker, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4"Error establishing a database connection"
Good content eh? - adie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I see articles like this and wonder if the diggs were paid for.
- gavintlgold, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Ok, those two yellow-iconed users must be the same guy....
- sulf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Gone are the days of [...] long load times"
Yeah, right, say it on digg. A lot of sites make heavy use of multiple external javascript scripts, css stylesheets and small images (userpics, etc) that make sites load and render long time. Yes, rendered interface looks cleaner and simpler, but the process itself takes way too much time (including digg stories with 100+ comments). - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1HMMMM.... I think Digg could learn a thing or two from this article.
Digg - WAY too much AJAX, javascript, long load times, and other bollox. - eliburford, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Why do sites have to die after the Digg effect... ?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1design= function + beauty
simplicity is a lame way of describing good design - itwasthursday, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1On the other hand, there is much more content today than before.
- pixelsherpa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If on a mac - screenshots like that can be captured with a super-slick little app called Paparazzi
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/24625 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2@bloc
http://browsershots.org/ - TylerLemieux, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Simplicity doesn't mean 'not visually appealing', there are ways of accomplishing both at the same time. You don't need to do anything complicated.
- sarahmaddelson, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Oh pixel fonts...my childhood ;))
- monsterhosting, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Beware Tyler commits fraud:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?p=4415420#post4415420 - kurotenshi, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2This would of been a great article, back in December 2005.
- jforward, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2"Error establishing a database connection"
It's simple, there no denying that... But geez, you can't just entirely ignore basic layout and aesthetics! - Metasquares, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Was I the only one who found it ironic that the link displays an error message?
- Spiritcatcher, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Photoshop has used a gray work space for almost 20 years.
- muka3d, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1It's ironic how simplicity in web design has been adopted now, in a day where high-speed internet is more widespread than ever!
- imakecomments, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1This site is pretty simple: http://www.d-e-f-i-n-i-t-e-l-y.com/
Simple, but brilliantly effective.
This one, on the other hand... http://www.worldwidewebhomepage.com/ - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2ironically, their site is not simple at all... but gaudy and quite ugly
- anagoge, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I'd call it Digg.
- NoobieDoobieDo, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1ORLY?
- TylerLemieux, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Because Site5 can't handle *****. Working on it =(
- littlelives, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0@manitoba98xp
Did you mean Screengrab?
http://andy.5263.org/screengrab/
Supports Firefox 2, but it hasn't been extensively tested. Or so the author claims. Working fine for me, though. - tomarocco, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5A screen shot is not a site mirror.
- TylerLemieux, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Thanks for the comments, good or bad, but remember to leave suggestions so I can improve. As for the downtime, Site5 is a ***** host and I'm working on switching right now. Any suggestions?
- unloud, on 10/12/2007, -9/+6Holy *****, duggmirror acctualy worked. Call the pope, it's a miricle!
- qeek, on 10/12/2007, -13/+10As a web designer, I couldn't agree more.
- chrillen, on 10/12/2007, -6/+2I say now what I always say. "Less is more" is an excuse for being lazy.
-
Show 51 - 63 of 63 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 