Google, Form, and FunctionPosted by Nate Jacobson on Mon, 21 Sep 2009
Google's meteoric rise to Web domination, near universal recognition, and canonization in the dictionary has been driven by their unparalleled execution of a simple function: returning the most relevant search results to Web users looking for love, car parts, or Jeopardy answers (I mean questions). It hasn't hurt that they have buttressed their core competency with a host of useful applications, mostly provided for free, that each reinforce and drive users back to that search function, their primary source of revenue. All the while, Google has resisted the siren call of a design makeover, apparently content with their "progammer aesthetic". Now, don't get me wrong. Programmers rock! And programming is very much a creative endeavor. As the Wordpress slogan nicely puts it: "Code is Poetry". Nonetheless, you can tell when a company unwilling to spring for a designer has dubbed their programmer for the task. The result is rarely pretty. But in view of their success, one could conclude that Google represents a decisive victory of function over form, or perhaps even the irrelevance of good design. But that might be a bit hasty. Their triumph is something less than a repudiation of the importance of design. I would contend that Google has succeeded in spite of its lack of content hierarchy, structure, and visual appeal, not because of it. One could conclude that Google represents a decisive victory of function over form, or perhaps even the irrelevance of good design.
A Case in PointThough I'm no fan of the Google aesthetic, or lack thereof, it turns out that I find myself there more often than not when I'm digging for something on the Web. I'm Exhibit A, an example of how Google manages to keep us in its Web in spite of itself. Indeed, in recent years, Google's competitors have tried to differentiate themselves and woo Web users with strong design. Ask.com has long boasted a perfectly elegant and attractive landing page as well as superior results pages in terms of organization. Now Bing.com has replicated their basic concept, if less successfully, and also added a number of innovations to their results. By contrast, Yahoo's approach has been to mimic Google on its cover, but utilize more structure in the results. Pleased as I am with what greets me when I land at Ask.com, I've made several efforts to make it my habitual launchpad for searching... without success. "Why?", you ask. The answer is staring you in the face. Turn your gaze to the upper reaches of this browser window. Chances are, you're one of Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Duis ac nunc luctus lectus molestie tempus. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Curabitur nec dui ut augue scelerisque eleifend sit amet in arcu. In sit amet nisl adipiscing tellus tincidunt fringilla. Curabitur ipsum nulla, mattis sit amet mattis posuere, dignissim eu erat. Donec non est quis ipsum placerat molestie eu nec neque. Praesent tempus varius magna eget tincidunt. Duis eget mattis quam. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Morbi quam ante, volutpat quis venenatis vitae, vehicula id orci. Suspendisse tortor ligula, convallis vitae viverra a, viverra interdum velit. Pellentesque justo purus, feugiat sed fringilla id, ornare vel mauris. Praesent dignissim, eros a sagittis ultricies, diam massa pulvinar leo, sed pretium tortor lacus ut massa. Suspendisse nec leo non felis molestie lobortis sit amet in magna. Praesent libero lacus, malesuada sit amet pharetra quis, suscipit quis erat. Fusce at nulla sit amet tortor tempus iaculis. Quisque imperdiet bibendum viverra. Nunc vulputate quam non magna pharetra ac sagittis magna facilisis. Proin vestibulum orci ac quam varius facilisis. |
