The look of web 2.0

One of the things that has fascinated me about recent website trends is design pattern similarities. I thought this post about recent web 2.o logos was rather interesting. It seems absolutely true that one positive outcome of this web 2.0 trend has been a renewed appreciation for workflow and appearance. The new sites seem clean, organized and energetic compared to those websites that are like living relics of 1998 web design (e.g. Art.com).

More than most people, I admit to being particularly fascinated with this meme. Some people even suggest that certain colors constitute a “real” web 2.0 website. Well, it is true that many of them look very similar!

For those out raising money for their web 2.o start-up, I love to observe whether or not the entreprenuers actually have any sense of this subtle trend. I’m not suggesting that it’s necessary for a start-up to have that web 2.0 look that so many others have. But, when start-up founders give me a blank stare when it comes to these kinds of trends I have to admit that I’m befuddled. I find myself thinking, “how could you be a real ‘web’ person and not notice this?” At the end of the day though, it isn’t really about fancy logos. But, I do think that user experience is an important and appreciated trend. So many sites could be so much better. I mentioned Art.com above because we’re working on our own art site called Imagekind.com and I’m trying to achieve something that is both original but also fun and pleasant to navigate. I’m teaming with smart people to help me think through various ways to improve upon the work I’ve already done in this regard. Art.com doesn’t need to concern themselves quite as much with this kind of thinking. They are first movers. They have huge advertising budgets. And that’s really a significant point. Some web 2.0 companies are genuinely new concepts. Others are merely new twists on old ideas which are destined to compete with established players. In such cases, renewed focus on execution, usability and appearance seems like one great way to gain an edge over the competition. And that’s why we’re seeing this trend. Start-ups can’t outspend the Art.com’s of the world. Consumating.com can’t beat Match.com by trying to outspend them. So, they can find an edge in the dating game by providing a fun, unique navigational experience and presenting it in a way that’s fun and easy for users to understand. It really translates to fresh thinking in terms of information architecture and usability. To me, this is one of the most important ways that new companies can stand out in a crowded field. I’ve looked at several new start-ups this year that are entering exciting but crowded sectors. When this attention to detail is missing in their strategy I tend to get nervous. In terms of new Seattle start-ups, I think Alex Castro over at Pluggd really gets this. The guys over at 43things.com got it right early and the gents at 37signals practically wrote the book on it. Ultimately, all this competition is going to lead to much better online experiences for consumers.

What Makes Curious Office Different?

Curious Office is both a seed stage investment firm and a software development company. We make early investments in the web sector and we choose to build our own companies at the same time. We have worked with many great technology entreprenuers over the last 15 years and we have accrued extensive experience ourselves working for or starting our own great software and web companies. Learn more about how Curious Office could possibly help your company grow to the next level.

Curious Office Portfolio

Curious Office

Search

62 Responses to “The look of web 2.0”

Leave a Reply

What Makes Curious Office Different?

Curious Office Portfolio

Advisory Board