News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why “Simple” Websites Are Scientifically Superior by jchendy on Sunday January 26, 2014 @11:11PM (#7128757)
Science can't tell us whether a design is superior. It can tell us that the design performed better in some specific test (such as a beauty rating), but leaping from that to blanket superiority is not science.
Re:Why “Simple” Websites Are Scientifically Superior by the_cat_kittles on Sunday January 26, 2014 @11:26PM (#7128805)
Yes! Thank you, I get annoyed when people think there is one definition of good design/art/beauty ...it's a thinly veiled display of narcissism. It's like trying to tell someone what kind of food they like, or who they find attractive- there are trends, and sometimes it seems like there are rules, but nothing is ever 100% universal as far as I can tell.
Re:Why “Simple” Websites Are Scientifically Superior by source99 on Monday January 27, 2014 @12:06AM (#7128913)
The article is discussing "simplicity" as one aspect of design. While I agree different designs can really only be viewed subjectively there are some aspects of simplicity that can be judged objectively.
Re:Why “Simple” Websites Are Scientifically Superior by MichaelGG on Monday January 27, 2014 @12:26AM (#7128971)
It's pretty clear that the superiority metric is going on what the site's intention is: conversion.

So while you're right it's not superior in every metric, it's superior in the only metric that the people creating the sites care about.