jase_coop

So my question is focused on the designed/engineered implementation of the select box. I was interested if anyone would bring this up or agree/disagree.

On principal, I see this as the equivalent of printing a white piece of paper with a black background. Thoughts?

I'm sure you'd agree, design isn't a democracy. Clearly, your users are wrong.

My point still stands. Just because Apple give you the choice to pinch and zoom doesn't mean that's the way it should be.

The fact you already have a mobile site but choose not to put it to its full use baffles me even further.

Well, very simple. The iPhone is capable of rendering and interacting with the full page. It was the first browser to do so - it don't require a lite version. You could tap, zoom, pinch, drag and get the full depth of the page. Other browsers - like those for Nokia, RIM etc couldn't handle that."

That's your main reason for not having a mobile site?

In terms of usability, zooming in on a mobile device to click on a website designed for a desktop browser is a nightmare. Just because it can be done, doesn't mean that's the way it should be. It results in a horrible experience.

Poor excuse, poor design.

A bunch of CSS3 animations whizzing around the page is the last thing we need. (Though it's likely to happen as people go crazy with new capabilities).

But with a bit of constraint these can be used to add value, simply the difference between good and bad design.

Simple HTML markup with a bit of CSS position would be a huge step up from flat jpegs, particularly as far as type is concerned.

I merely make a comparison between the early days, intentions and motives of both Google+ and Facebook, how they're different and why I think that difference is important.

Not if it's something people don't need or want in the first place.

If Google have 'innovated' then it means they've created something original and new that is useful for people. Only time will tell, but my personal opinion, based on what I've seen so far is they haven't.

I just don't think their motives will lead to innovation.

I'm not excusing Facebook and how they make money today. These aren't the same motives that influenced their reason for being, which were a lot more focused on people and universities.

Design is about solving problems, and a design led company/individual adopts a certain mind frame that often tends to contrast that of the engineer.

If you're designing a consumer product and your engineered concept works so well that you can actually consider whether or not you 'design' it, well, lucky you.

These 'cool', 'creative' pockets within cities such as San Francisco, London and Berlin that the article suggest as a vital ingredient for developing the perfect startup environment are merely the result of artists after cheap spaces to work, exhibit and live.

After time, cool-hunters follow, prices go up, locals are pushed out, companies move in.

London, particularly the East, is full of areas such as this.

Sure, I could position the clickable links over a linked area, but it'd be a usability nightmare with a constant pointer in link state.

I'll give it to you on your first point though, the contrast on the text is slightly low.

Thanks for the 2c.