What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
32 Comments
- jriley101, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Because they expect to Google to buy them off and then add them to the pile of "Google Everything".
http://www.oozm.com/search/index.php/List_of_Acquisitions_by_Google - rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8I think it is great that the company hosting this page of acquisitions is on their list of probable acquisitions for 2006! Way to go. Was that part of YOUR business plan?
- mycatsboots, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Giggle?
- gwjc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Doh, I thought it was What Would Jappetto Do?
- sandrat44, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3This article is great especially for those who are in full control of their own sites. But sometimes, no matter what you do or how you say it, there's that client that just insists on doing what Google does, no matter what.
Perhaps this might help:
http://digg.com/design/Clients_and_web_designers_living_in_perfect_harmony - YoHowdy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4It's What Would Brian Boitano do?
- sorpigal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"Google was not a success because their homepage was sparse." -- this is utter nonsense. This is yet-another design wonk bashing Google, and especially Google immitators, for "bad dsign." While I agree that immitating Google's design isn't likely to assure any success, the points about the Google 'sparse' look only being bad are dead wrong.
When I first saw Google it was at the height of the portal craze. Infoseek, Webcrawler, Hotbot and Yahoo had all turned into flashy, heavy, annoying places. Someone linked me to Google, I clicked, and... WOW. Yes, for a brief second my mind said "What the hell is this?!" but it was only because it was such a departure from the other search engines. I grasped immediately that it *was* a search engine, but I thought it was surely a joke. Because search engine "portals" didn't look like that. They weren't that simple.
But I entered a search term and *BLAM*! On my 28.8 dialup the results loaded like they were a page on my local disk. This was partly due to the power of Google's infrastructure, but mostly it was the very sparse page design.
Could Google have used a more "correctly designed" (if there is such a thing) page and achieved the same effect? Sure. But to say that the bareness, the lack of clutter and the feeling of openness did not contribute to Google's success is inaccurate at best.
For me 90% of the reason I used Google for the first few months was that it was simple and clean. It was only when I went back to Infoseek for a while that I noticed how horrible its search results were. And this is the point at which their technical edge kicks in: I came for the sparse design, I stayed for the better results.
No digg. - wintermute1974, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2So do we now need buttons and bumper stickers that ask: WWGD?
- panic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Why do so many people think that imitating Google is the only thing they need to do to be successful?"
actually most ppl don't imitate google (with the exception of microsoft and yahoo), because there's almost a certain chance of failure. who in their right mind would try to compete directly with google and expect to win? - sinner0423, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3You heard it here first, folks : Google will be buying out Digg, turning it in to Gigg.
- rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Thanks, for the comment, Yoda. Oh, and the trolling for hits, too.
- ajb2015, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yeah, he acts like Google's simple web page didn't attract searchers, which is dead wrong. If Google cluttered their page with directories, ads, etc. I would be much more likely to switch.
- coudron, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I don’t know what this guy is thinking.
“But Google was successful in spite of their design … users were willing to overlook their (Google’s) hostile user experience.”
Who is this guy kidding? He is calling what is known to be the friendliest search engine on the internet a “hostile user experience.”
“Imagine a web page with just a logo, a form entry field, and a submit button. What does it do? Only one way to find out. Some call that brilliant – I call it mean.”
A submit button that says “Google Search” on it. I guess if your deductive reasoning skills have not evolved past that of a four-year-old you would consider this mean.
This guy has a few valid points, mostly for the fact that Google is ahead of the game. Other than that, he seems to think that an excessively complicated web page is better than a simple one. - Zjm7891, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Now, instead of digging we
Gigg-ity Gigg-ity - nitrojunky24, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5isn't copying other people what Microsoft has always done?
- treelovinhippie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"New feelings brewing inside of Duffman... What Would Google Do?"
:D - wakaseoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I so much agree with you. Yes I like the sparse and fast to load interface of google homepage. I still don't understand how people can be willing to go on msn.com and I don't understand the idea of still article why stands that richness is better.
Now, the design of technorati is pretty good too. But these two sites don't share the same goal. Obviously they don't follow the same design rules. In my opinion, it would make more sense to compare technorati.com with news.google.com
Definitely not digged - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Google is only successful at search & ads. They have not had any inspiring successes in any other venture.
- Ashex, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2I think you're half-right on that one. Google Grabbed all the ideas and techniques that nobody really thought about much and re-worked them into something fantastic.
- PrimoTurbo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1That article sucked...the guy plugs in his own search engine near the end and explains how it's different.
Muahah take a look at this pos, http://www.technorati.com should of just copied Google... - tastethesky7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I hate all the junk that comes from a google search. I use dogpile.com and have been completely satisfied with it.
- Vector713, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1good read.
digg++ - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well, that's the sort of unoriginality that people have long criticized Microsoft for. Except ironically, in Microsoft's case, they take ideas that other people thought of, do them crappily, and make a lot of money, whereas Google takes them and does them really well, and has yet to turn a profit on them.
- ACalcutt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I like the google look...better than his two site examples
- burtonrider, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0google has been copyin alot of other sites. froogle copyin all the brand store websites. google guys are makin billions for no reason
- thefinger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0fwiw, I agree, 110.3%
When I first saw google, it seemed almost too minimal to be a real search engine. Everybody else had portals with banners and graphics and of course links. Too many, way too many. Enter Google.
Gord - DoubtfulSalmon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1That's an interesting little reality that the dopey polish git has dreamed up for himself. Pity it's got nothing to do with real life as the rest of us see it!
- CaughtThinking, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Let's reverse the article, because Google is the one without the original ideas. All they do is a pick random ideas and try to do them better.
- redxii, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"What would Google do?"
Ask the EU and US DoJ.
Sorry couldn't resist. - acurism, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Hmm, Google creates something and it becomes very popular.
Microsoft sees this, and they imitate Google... - nethenm, on 04/01/2008, -7/+0A lot of Digg articles seem to be devoted to nonsense about Google.
I am tired of this Google lovefest. - ecahoon, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2Working in a framework that has proven to be successful? Perhaps that is the reason. Repeatable? That is to be seen.
http://www.deepmarket.com
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is