Derek is to blame for so much blog discussion at SXSW. That sounds like it should best be said while standing in the back of a wagon looking over a group of angry hicks with pitchforks and torches.
Hurumph, hurumph!
I wasn't exactly the panel/session type so I don't know about you but I didn't hear too much about blogs this year. Catholic Pictionary and dolphin milk, yes. Blogs, no.
Back in 2002 there was nothing but talk about blogs and how the independents had lived through the .bomb, emerging to take hold of the very medium they loved. I think someone made an effigy out of the sock puppet and burned it on sixth avenue but that came from a blog so who knows if it really happened or it was just the Honey Coated Sugar Smacks overdose rant of the author.
While I'm grumpy from waking up too early after a fourteen-hour work day I can't hold back: What the hell is Craig Newmarks problem?
Now don't run to the comments to bash me for all the good he's done in the world, I get that already. Good. Fine. Wonderful.
Perhaps it's because I'm Design Eye Alumni but his dead-pan-non-reaction to the excellent work the boys did for his baby had me wishing I had brought a cattle prod to SXSW (note to self: make hotel reservations earlier and bring a voltage wand).
I don't think anyone was expecting, or even wishing for Craig to jump up, Harvey Birdman French Twist Style, and declare that humanity now has a new face but I didn't think he would react like he would be happier wearing an orange jumpsuit on a sunny Caribbean isle.
It was a scene that would be a perfect bit in an episode of the Larry David Show.
Given Craig's reaction, I think the presentation could have been made better if we were all sitting on really hard, musty furniture with dishes of hard candy (lightly coated with dust) in front of us and a grandfather clock reminding everyone of how slowly time goes by when you're not having fun.
My hat is off to whomever it was who closed the session by making a point that it didn't matter what Craig thought of the new design, that the decision was up the users.
One more thing, Andrei if you don't comment to this post I'm so going to hack your site and put Adobe and Macromedia logos all over it. Not that too many people would notice. The last time you updated your site Clinton was in office. Yeah, I said it.
Join the fray by reading through and commenting at the end.
Unfortunately I had to leave early and missed this panel. Its disappointing, but I guess not too surprising, to hear of Craig's (non-)reaction. I guess its hard to take, especially when you don't know the final result ahead of time, of others messing with your "baby," especially when you're not a designer by nature.
Glad you posted this. I don't think many would be as candid (with the exception of Scrivs) as you.
On one hand I understand Craig's non-reaction, in that he's about as deadpan as anybody I've met. That said, he could have been a bit more gracious about it. The Design Eye guys were certainly respectful and gracious to him. I loved how he was giving his little deadpan answers, and Keith called him on it "Yeah, but do you like it?"
If Craig's all about getting out of the way of his users, that underscores the point of that audience member. If the users dig the new design then who is he to get in the way? Power to the people!
Well, the people around here who saw the pages I sent out loved the new look and wished CL would adopt it.
Oh, snap!
I was underwhelmed by Craig's reaction as well, especially when he mentioned that he would have to defer the decision to Jim Buckmaster. It would have been nice to see him take a little bit of ownership of his darling, rather than shrug responsibility for the future of Craigslist off on the CEO. Nice duck, as they say.
Honestly though, the decision is up to the users, and I thought that was definitely the theme of SXSWi this year. We're over this blog stuff, this AJAX stuff, and now we're pawing through our toolboxes not to find hot ways to write code and effects that make us want to wank off all night, but to find ways to build for people what they need. Or want. Or need to want.
I was not at SXSW but I did see the design you guys did. As far as I'm concerned Craig should have fallen at your feet and cried "I'm not worthy!"
Fantastic work on your group's part.
How did they measure the usability improvement?
How did they measure the usability improvement?
Monkeys. Lots and lots of monkeys. Oh and I think Keith was put through 24 hours of rigorous testing. The results showed remarkable improvement and that Keith is immune to the bird flu.
The results showed remarkable improvement and that Keith is immune to the bird flu.
Someday, before he grows too powerful, someone will have to put a stop to his schemes.
I was sitting next to Craig during the panel, and I kept glancing over at him to see how he was reacting. There was no reaction...the guy could have been made of stone with a pigeon perched atop his head.
Keith just took some AJAX and now he's inoculated from the flu. That's why we need AJAX everywhere.
I completely agree. At first I wrote it off as simple embarassment (as he seemed quite red) but when someone finally asked him directly and his response was to pawn it off as someone else's decision, I was surprised. For something that took that much time and energy, and even made a very strong point to stick to the same constraints that craigslist has always held itself too, I was very surprised to see such an underwhelmed reaction.
Perhaps Jacob Nielsen is holding his children hostage and was informed that if he in any way indicated interest in something aestheticaly pleasing they'd get it square between the eyes.
At the end of the day, it's still his site. And no matter how beautiful, usable, or new-and-improved the Design Eye makeover may have been, nobody has justification to be indignant over Craig's lack of displayed enthusiasm. Disappointed, sure, but not indignant.
....nobody has justification to be indignant over Craig's lack of displayed enthusiasm.
Lack of enthusiasm? Try lack of emotion.
Is it possible that he hated it, and rather than making a show of his displeasure, he opted to show nothing at all?
Please understand that I'm not implying that the design is... hate-worthy (is that a word?), I quite liked it myself.
I saw Craig at the keynote and he didn't strike me as a gusher. So he didn't say anthing or jump about - so what? Doesn't seem like that kind of guy. People get nervous on stage. Cut him some slack. I thought the rework was very well done BTW.
As a regular user of craigslist, I really did not like the new design. Sure all that white space, in the new design, makes it look better, but what makes craigslist functional is its compactness.
I think the new design fails functionally, and a great example of this is the horizontal layout of the cities and countries at the bottom. And the type selection in the new design does not work well either.
I don't feel the main page of craigslist is really the main problem, it's things like the discussion forums that could use help.
I think the better approach would have been to take the existing layout, and make slight contrast and font adjustments, making sure the compactness of the current design is maintained, and then maybe you would have seen a better reaction from Craig!
People get nervous on stage. Cut him some slack.
From my seat in the front row, Craig didn't appear nervous, he looked bored.
...then maybe you would have seen a better reaction from Craig!
Kama, I'm thankful that someone has posted why they didn't like the work. Finally! As much as the Design Eye guys walked on egg shells while presenting the fruits of their labor I think a lot of people have done the same with the response. This tap-dancing-non-reaction is completely unwarranted and unwanted. Designers are an emotional bunch (well the good ones are) but that doesn't mean that they don't deserve constructive criticism. And not the kind that only speaks too what is liked about the design but also what is is not liked.
Otherwise how are designers able to grow their talent and skills?
It's unfortunate that this opportunity to give and receive "high-level" feedback was wasted. If Craig had only hateful things to say about the design then I suppose it's best that he just sat up on stage and played canned Spam but he strikes me as an intelligent person who, with his CEO hat on, could have used this opportunity in many ways — it's not often that funded companies get free design work on the level that was presented in Austin.
If anything I would have loved it if Craig have taken a few minutes to speak to role design plays, or doesn't play, in fostering communities like Craigslist.
At the very least it would have been nice to get a few words about how awkward his position was at the moment (in a room full of designers, do you stand up and speak out about how design played absolutely no role in the success of the community so why bother now? I would have, but I like to start forrest fires. However Craig has the success that could take a few hits without stretching surface so why not?).
Yesterday Craig posted: "...a bunch of good designers did "Design Eye for the List Guy", redesign of craigslist, lot of good ideas." I can only hope that one day we'll learn what those good (and bad) ideas are.
"That said, he could have been a bit more gracious about it."
As a fellow graphic designer who can't help tinker with a client's existing logo or brand identity designed by some second rate agency 5 years ago, I can understand the POV of the 'design eye' group. At the same time, I completely understand how arrogant and pointless it is to expect a reaction from Craig. It's like when your aunt (insert silly stereotypical aunt name) shops for clothes for you. She think she's doing the right thing, but, in the end, you just smirk and despise the fact she does it.
If anything I would have loved it if Craig have taken a few minutes to speak to role design plays,...
Greg, I agree, Craig could have used the opportunity to give his feedback on the new design. I was a little surprised to see no constructive criticism of the new design, are there no critical thinkers in the design world? Or are people just too captivated by the "God's of Web Design"!!
Or maybe he was thinking... "well it's gotten THIS far without a slick design..". Who knows.
As you say, with a little bit of feedback it sounds like it could have been an interesting discussion, if nothing else.
I wasn't there and the re-design LOOKS better, but how is the functionality improved? If I wasn't a designer and it was my baby I'd be more worried about improving functionality for the users than making it look pretty (I am NOT saying this is right, just projecting slightly).
And yeah, maybe he just prefers to take things away with him before commenting heavily... in which case, why turn up? Odd.
Does anyone know if they contacted Craig about it beforehand? I'm curious about when he found out that they were doing a redesign. I really hope he didn't find out just at SXSW - that would put him really on the spot.
We contacted "Craigslist" a few months in advance just be sure there wouldn't be any issues with him keynoting and then us featuring the site. Craig knew before SXSW about our panel, but didn't see anything at all until the day of. He didn't know, however, that an audience member would eventually get him up on stage with us...
He didn't know, however, that an audience member would eventually get him up on stage with us...
Yeah that was all Rob's doing. Red heads, we like to cause problems...
I'm good at making people uncomfortable. It's, like, my calling.
Clearly if design was important to craigslist, they'd have paid to have someone rework it by now.
I don't mean to be rude, but what did you expect? Was Craig supposed to say he loved it, and say 'we're redoing the whole site' right there on stage, without talking to anyone back at the ranch?
As much as all that Times New Roman and varying shades of grey offends thine eyes, it's unprofessional look may well help non-pro web users get comfortable with it.
Sean it would have been nice if you would have read through the comments so that you would have read what I, and others, excepted.
As much as all that Times New Roman and varying shades of grey offends thine eyes, it's unprofessional look may well help non-pro web users get comfortable with it.
A lack of design has nothing to do with it. Craigslist's ease of use, excellent community management, and stance against advertising abuse are responsible for the success of the site.
Deferring judgement may not have had anything to do with whether he like the design or not. Craigslist may have business plans in place for the future to feature Feature X or Option Y. Or maybe their business plan is to incorporate unknown Feature Z. If this re-design did not properly feature those items, that could put a huge wrench in the works.
Or, features aside, it is very possible that the company has been undergoing a thorough investigation of this internally and already have great work going on.
Regardless, does one really expect a representative of a company with many stakeholders to just get up on stage and say"Yep, let's go with it. It will be up tomorrow. Tune in."
Or, more to the point that Greg seems to be getting at, it is a bit presumptious to ask him to critque the work in front of an audience. Why? Did he agree to do so? Is he "qualified" to do so? Did he have time to digest the design and consider his opinions? Do you expect your clients to answer on the spot when you present proofs? Would his critique have been rebutted in front of an audience or via blogs?
Great work and I'm sure it was a very interesting panel, but expecting anything more than that is presumptious. I believe this is not a rep of the company speaking directly, so maybe they did not expect anything more than what they got as far as a response.
A lack of design has nothing to do with it. Craigslist's ease of use, excellent community management, and stance against advertising abuse are responsible for the success of the site.
Greg, I respectfully disagree with your statement that Craigslists simple/basic HTML design has nothing to do with building trust with the folks who use the site. Design for plenty of folks goes right together with advertisers, used car salesman and marketers -- who are surely mischievous and rotten people quite a bit of the time. By under-selling and under-designing, Craigslist lets visitors know that it's not there to rip you off or scam you. Craigslists real-world equivalents are the yard sale sign, the for rent sign and the classifieds.
And, I mostly agree with what Sean said too.
I agree with Greg regarding the principals of the business that has become the real story about the success of cragislist.com. There's also an aspect of it being first (and largely free for a number of years) that goes along with it that built up a natural inertia with regard to the site and everyone's use of it.
As for the design part of the equation, and those that either like the current craigslist design or think the redesign wasn't their cup of tea, I think one my design heroes pretty much sums it up in this excellent quote:
"The public is more familiar with bad design than good design. It is, in effect, conditioned to prefer bad design, because that is what it lives with. The new becomes threatening, the old reassuring."
Thank you, Paul Rand.
And don't believe him? Just visit any normal mall or mass consumerism shopping area in this country and you have all the proof you need.
And so no one gets all in a huff at me or whatnot... I'm not saying that if you like the design of craigslist you are one of those people who not only like crap design, but don't mind surrounding yourself with it or wallowing in it like some unaware swine who's being fed all sorts of junk in order to be fattened up for the slaughter by the farmer guy whom you put your trust in for living what you thought was the high life. No, I'm saying that at all. Rand is.
I just happen to agree with Rand.
Design for plenty of folks goes right together with advertisers, used car salesman and marketers -- who are surely mischievous and rotten people quite a bit of the time.
I can't hold back: "...one of these things is not like the other, one of these things does not belong..." Designers are "mischievous" and "rotten people"? Gee Chas, what's it like living in North Korea?
Sean it would have been nice if you would have read through the comments so that you would have read what I, and others, excepted.
I did read through all of the comments. Saying that you didn't have an expectation for a boistrous reaction, but then getting upset at no reaction shows that maybe you did have that expectation after all.
My points:
1. Having an expectation, when presenting a design to someone that doesn't care about design is a recipe for disappointment. Frankly, that's a pretty preachy point to make, especially on someone's personal blog where they should have the leeway to rant. I retract.
2. That the lack of visual design on craigslist actually is a conscious choice (or more likely became one after time) that has actual benefit, because it as seen as non-threatening to people that don't place a high value on visual design (see also: the comment above re: Rand). I should be specific in talking about visual design--I don't think anyone's aruging that craigslist doesn't have well-designed usability.
Gee Chas, what's it like living in North Korea?
Clearly he was making the point that high design is often associated with things that are 'slick' and 'slick' things are often associated with 'people trying to seperate you from your money as soon as possible'. Look, I sip gallons of latte on my wifi-connected Powerbook with the best of them, but I know from growing up in the midwest that most people don't care much about typography or branding or color treatments.
I went back and read the Research report at:
http://misc.cameronmoll.be/craigslist-report.pdf
A lot of hay was made about about how craiglist isn't 'professional'. I don't really understand that metric, especially in regards to usability. If the site is knocking it out of the park on 'Easy to Use', 'Easy to Read', and 'Clean', what value does a label like 'Professional' have? It sounds like the kind of thing a newspaper would slag craigslist for (while they're frantically trying to find a new business model), or print designers slag web designers for, or 'real programmers' slag web programmers for.
In the report, I found it a little disappointing that all of the one-on-ones were with 'web savvy' people, but even one of them said:
"When I asked her if she felt Craigslist was “professional” she said no, but she’d not have it any other way."
It would have been more interesting to me if more people would have been surveyed, especially with an emphasis on people that were less web-savvy, but this was a volunteer thing.
All the guys working on the panel were pros, and I don't doubt that they put a lot of work into it, and I don't doubt that it was worth many thousands of bucks retail. Pity that it may all go to waste--perhaps the next round should work with a high-profile charity or non-profit that needs the help and will commit to using it.
(And, c'mon. Your North Korea slam is pretty asshat-y, don't you think?)
"That the lack of visual design on craigslist actually is a conscious choice (or more likely became one after time) that has actual benefit..."
I hate letting stuff like this pass.
The conscience decision on anyone's part was that the original site had no designer and they didn't want to pay for one, therefore, they simply used the crap defaults from early HTML which was also created by a non-designer. the conscience decision was that a single engineer didn't want to expend more effort than he had to in order to make the original site. It then just afterwards.
This by the way, the EXACT same thing that happened at eBay, Google, Yahoo, the whole lot of them.
Further, if design has no place in something as simple as craigslist, then it has no business anywhere. There's no place to draw that line and it's an instant slippery slope.
"but I know from growing up in the midwest that most people don't care much about typography or branding or color treatments."
Yes they do. They don't care about it in the same way a designer does, but they care about it in the exact same way they care about what a good editor or good music composer or good cinematographer or good actor does in a movie. Because without it, their world would be a muddled mess of visuals that give them a headache in the first minute they walk out of their house.
As for the research report, I'll let Keith argue his own point on that issue.
Because without it, their world would be a muddled mess of visuals that give them a headache in the first minute they walk out of their house.
Just wanted to repeat that.
Truth be told, much of good design goes unnoticed. And it really should be that way.
Andrei, you really need to start blogging again. Love your writing.
Sean -- As far as the report goes, it was far from scientifically accurate. However it was useful for us in trying to find something we could improve on. Professionalism and trustworthiness were the two things we could address visually.
I feel that were we really showed the value of design was not in the visual sense though. The restructure of information and some of our ideas to improve search, mobile access and the like is where the meat of what we did comes in.
I swear if I read another "pretty vs. ugly" post relating to design...
We were not trying to "make craigslist pretty" we wanted to explore ways to improve it, if that was possible, and hopefully teach a few things in the process.
Keep in mind, this was done for a presentation. Part of the motivation here was to provide something engaging. We went for craigslist, in part, because it was a controversial choice. We also chose something that we thought would be a considerable challenge. I can speak for the others involved when I say we wanted to learn ourselves.
As far as the one-on-ones go -- it just so happened that I couldn't find anyone who wasn't at least a bit Web savvy to do a one-on-one. Sue me. ;0) And, for the record, the survey was sent out to a pretty good cross-section of people. Many were not Web savvy.
Truth be told, much of good design goes unnoticed. And it really should be that way.
Hans, you're right on the money. Only bad "designers" seek to showboat to the extent that it ruins the very thing that design was supposed to help in the first place.
Andrei, you really need to start blogging again. Love your writing.
I concur and also add that you too, Tomas, need to start blogging again. Both of you suck.
I hate letting stuff like this pass.
The conscience decision on anyone's part was that the original site had no designer and they didn't want to pay for one, therefore, they simply used the crap defaults from early HTML which was also created by a non-designer. the conscience decision was that a single engineer didn't want to expend more effort than he had to in order to make the original site. It then just afterwards.
Andrei -- I don't believe you read his entire statement.
(or more likely became one after time)
Your point is not in disagreement with his. He clearly states, it was a concious decision then (and that is a possibility), or it became a concious decision to keep it that way.
Yes they do. They don't care about it in the same way a designer does, but they care about it in the exact same way they care about what a good editor or good music composer or good cinematographer or good actor does in a movie. Because without it, their world would be a muddled mess of visuals that give them a headache in the first minute they walk out of their house.
Now, here I think you're putting words into his mouth. CL is not a muddled mess of visuals that gives anyone a headache. Clearly we are not speaking of design in this regard. This is more intricate than gives headache vs. does not give headache and I would guess that Sean meant it to be interpreted to be more than that as well.
Keith:
I swear if I read another "pretty vs. ugly" post relating to design...
People keep mentioning it because the point has merit. Sorry, many feel it's true in regards to CL, and all else, on many levels.
Say yah to da U.P. eh?
Anyone else get the feeling we're entering a new age of design? Cragslist, Google, Yahoo...they all share this "less design thinking is better" mentality. We're also so overbranded as a culture that it's sickening. We always strived to let the world know how important good design is in general. Well, guess what? People listened. Not only did they listen but they adopted it as a must. Now you can't walk down the street without a new coffee shop displaying helvetica stickers with lovely branded colors. All well and good, in fact great, but we're becoming too branded to the point of mediocrity. It almost feels as though craigslit, google, and the like, are a refreshing breather from a world where good design is shoved down our throats. Or perhaps it's sheer laziness. Who knows.
Chas -- The point doesn't have merit. The people who are bringing this up simply don't understand design..
Ugly vs. Pretty doesn't have all that much to do with design. Especially in the cases mentioned. For what it's worth, I've never looked at Craigslist and thought "ugly". Same goes for Google, which I feel probably was designed to be the way it is.
MySpace is ugly as homemade sin IMO. However, as a designer, if I were to tackle MySpace from an "Ugly vs. Pretty" standpoint. No way. I'd look to design to find ways to make it easier to understand and use. Sure it could be "prettied up" but that's not its biggest problem. I challange anyone to defend MySpace from a usability standpoint.
Craiglist could be improved without adding a lick of style. Sure, I think it could benefit from that style -- as one thing I heard over and over again is that people were put off by the amateurish feel of it (which I fully realize is endearing to some) -- but it could be improved, from a design standpoint by reorganizing the information, creating visual hierarchy and adding some white space for easier reading -- for example. You don't need "pretty" do to that.
Regardless, what is imporant to note is that what makes these sites successful is the content contained within. They are successful despite the fact that they aren't designed well, not because of it. This means that they could be even more successful, and, in the case of MySpace for example, they're leaving the door open for better designed competition.
Keith, No disagreement here -- just misinterpreted what you were meaning by ugly/pretty.
Chas -- It's cool. Semantics can be a pain in the arse! ;0)