Be nice. Or else.
UX Designer @ Bluebeam, Inc. Joined about 4 years ago
Yeah it seems best if I see stuff that can be improved to just do a codepen showing exactly the properties/timing/delay and how it should work. I have quite a bit of front end knowledge so I can do this but I'm sure it's pretty rough for those that don't have as much front end knowledge.
Designer/Dev communication about animation is pretty hard ATM. Traditional design tools cannot communicate this well and prototyping every micro interaction can be incredibly time consuming.
One of the big reasons I've switched to Figma. Copy editing is really really easy when they can simply leave a comment on what they want changed, or you can give them edit access if you are confident in their ability to not move things around and edit the copy.
Your site seems to be getting flagged as malware for some reason.
This is really smooth. I'm always on the lookout for better tools for IA & user flow work and this seems like a promising start. I always end up falling back to draw.io, which is useful but clunky and not super flexible with making revisions.
Price point seems a little steep for what it offers currently. $120/year for essentially flow chart app is going to be a tough sell. The free version is very generous though as I would have expected roughly 1-2 for free and depending on the roll out of he "coming soon" features it could be worth the price soon.
It depends on the traffic being driven to this page. I think conversational landing page would 100% fail on a first touch search ad campaign, it's too much work to get to relevant high level information. For something like a remarketing campaign or as a follow up for a tradeshow lead it might be very successful. Those people may already be interested and motivated but need to find specific information to help them understand the value and transition further into the funnel.
That being said I think your "traditional" landing page is suffering from some issues as well. I'm going to assume you are mainly targeting mobile users because the primary CTA is to download from the App store. Problem with this is the download buttons don't appear on mobile until you scroll down nearly two whole screens heights. On top of that the mobile version's first impression is basically a pretty illustration and half a youtube video, I get almost no information without scrolling pretty far down the page. There needs to be some sort of value based copy immediately to entice anyone to give your site a chance.
Honestly if you simply flipped the "Meditation App for a Better Life" section to the top and added CTA's to that section you'd probably have a lot more success. This would be one the the first things I'd split test if I was trying to improve this page.
To be frank this seems like trying to run before walking. Conversational UI's are hard to get right (Lemonade does one really well) and it feels like there isn't a strong enough grasp on what content is valuable in this case to really craft one yet. A conversational UI will not improve poor information architecture.
I think it's also one of the biggest things holding cryptocurrencies back right now. It's not easy, but it could be a lot easier, even the main bitcoin website is pretty bad at helping users understand how bitcoin works and what they are supposed to do to get started.
I've been into cryptocurrencies since 2014 and I don't feel like I've gotten past the tip of the iceberg, I cannot imagine how daunting it probably feels to my parents...
Nice! Now just give me the ability to overlay components on my original page so I don't have to create so many duplicate pages.
A/B tests consume a lot of time and effort. Do you really feel it’s worth investing that time? It may be a better use of our time to make a gut decision on this, or find proxy data that we can use now.
Do they really? There are certainly instance where this is true but in my experience split testing is relatively low effort (2-3 hours of pitching/setup/reporting time for one person) and a good way to validate ideas and be sure that our "gut" is accurate. Especially in areas where user testing doesn't quite give that level of precision (i.e. what users say they do vs what they actually do).
Otherwise this is a pretty good list but that one particular felt a bit short sighted.
Learned a lot of the same lessons playing MMO's especially making mistakes while being an officer in a guild. Learned how to manage people, how to build up a team around a common goal, and how to give effective feedback that turns into actual results.
I will say that a lot of video games do not encourage this kind of learning anymore. Many have become so incredibly anti-social (through handholding in social situations or downplaying the importance of communication) so most of these lessons are not absorbed by all but the most ambitious players these days. So while I can abstract a lot of positives from my game playing experience I've see the opposite path as well.
It's a fine line to be sure.
Be nice. Or else.
Designer News is a large, global community of people working or interested in design and technology.