I truly don't get this. There's no reasoning behind any of the design decisions and it looks like he's simply copied a load of his design assets from his Twitter "redesign" shot. https://dribbble.com/shots/1546643-Twitter-Profile?list=users&offset=1
This further solidifies my belief to ignore anything I see on Dribbble.
Yeah, not digging it. For some reason it strikes me as a medical site.
Looks just like Twitter.com, except on Twitter the profile isn't in a card, but the "Who to Follow" is.
Was instantly also my first thought.
Also its very sad that it loses so much of its actual CI. Thats in every redesign a huge deal breaker.
LinkedIn's design problems are more strategic than visual. Why paint a house that's burning down?
EDIT: I just noticed that this shot is the most popular one on Dribbble. Has that site jumped the shark?
✓ Circle avatars
✓ Proxima Nova
✓ Outlined buttons
✓ Completely arbitrary
Passes the HipstaDribbble™ test with flying colors.
I would not classify this as a 'site design', DN needs a new category and icon for this type of post.
How about The Same Shit From Dribbble That Everyone Is Doing?
I'd upvote this twice if I could.
How about Shibble? (Shit dribbble)
Nope, not one more time please.
Looks nice! I'm not a huge linked in fan, but with a simpler design and easier to navigate site something like this might change my mind :)
The layout/look of an online resume (which is essentially what LinkedIn is built around) got replaced by a “social profile” strategy. It diverges so far from LinkedIn’s real purpose (even putting aside the obvious Twitter comparisons), that it doesn't really count as a “redesign” for me.
Like a completely different website that happened to have the same name.
I’d also recommend upping all the font-weights. The barely-there light type on top of stark white and off-white backgrounds make it hard to read. Also, some stronger visual hierarchies might help?