Garbage design
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
>everything must be oversimplified, otherwise the user might get lost in the eternal void of the internet
>also all the content must be only in the middle of the screen, otherwise if they try to move their heads too fast these might get unscrewed and eventually lost
Who the fuck designs these websites? Or who they're designed for?
>>51639371
phones and tablets you stupid fuck
I bet you still use a desktop
fucking dinosaur
>>51639371
the pic in your OP is fine dude.
>simple design
no superfluous information, just pictures, loads quickly
>centered screen
standard format across the web, minimum fuss for scaling via responsive design
or would you rather have this:
http://www.lingscars.com/
>>51639406
You seem to be lost, this is not macrumors.
>>51639371
>All white webpages
>>51639430
>http://www.lingscars.com/
HAHAHAAHHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHHAHAHA
>>51639457
THIS
>>51639406
So what? You need everything mashed in the middle of the screen and not more than one button otherwise te user might get confused?
I know this is bait, but still..
>>51639430
>no superfluous information
No nothing, really.
>just pictures
Yeah, only 9. I could easily get 3 times more per page at that resolution.
>loads quickly
Nno, it doesn't.
>http://www.lingscars.com/
Well, no, not in the current state, but with some cleanup, yes.
>>51639457
Also this.
>>51639500
>muh aesthetic sensibilities are offended
shit's subjective, build a competitor and rek them if you care this much
>>51639562
Well, it's not about that site in particular. There are many other atrocities like it.
>>51639371
i design these websites and FOR MY CLIENTS
if you aint paying then STFU !!!
>>51639631
Someone's actually paying for that? Oh lol, hahhahahaha
>>51639576
do something anon
shoot up a web design convention or something, targeting only those who go for the simplistic view
>>51639722
Are you instigating me to commit murders, anon?
>>51639430
Lings cars isnt actually that bad and on mobile is quite decent
>Getting mad at good design that even idiots could use
>Not realizing that design that an idiot can use is good design on the basis that if an idiot can use it, anyone can
Instagram's desktop site literally just needs to show you pictures some people took, and how you can interact with them upon clicking on them. It doesn't look like a souped up mess like photobucket a decade ago, but it doesn't fucking need to
>>51639811
nothing personal kid