1. 44
  1.  

  2. 14

    A couple things struck me about the redesign –

    • The HTML is clean as a whistle. Looks great in text browsers.
    • There’s no big fat call to action at the top of the page! Compare to, say, Atom’s site, which features a huge Download link front and center. I consider this a blunder.
    1. 3

      It is quite nice looking. A couple minor complaints:

      • The text on the right side in the screenshot is wrapped, which looks a bit messy. It would look neater if the size of the window were increased by a mere 5 columns.
      • “Full Unicode support for nearly all human languages and their scripts.” Supporting “nearly all” human languages would be a really neat trick when you consider that nearly half of all human languages don’t even use a writing system! I’m sure they meant “nearly all human writing systems”.
      1. 2

        To be fair, you cannot simply use emacs out of the box, so downloading it before they know what they’re getting into is not conducive to good user experience. In this case I believe the blunder to not include the videos on how to use it closer to the top of the page.

      2. 6

        For comparison, here’s some other landing-pages for other popular text editors

        Personally, I think that the atom site is the most visually appealing by far.

        1. 6

          GNU Guile also got a new look somewhat recently. One of my favorite OSS site designs to date.

          1. 10

            I think you mean FS site design. ;-)

          2. 4

            Hmm, I personally like the Sublime Text and Emacs ones best. Concise explanation of what it is, then screenshot, then list of features.

            Next-best for me are atom and code. The atom one looks too much like a sales pitch for some kind of PaaS cloud service.

            The vim one is the worst, dumping you into a news feed that assumes you know what this is to begin with. The neovim one also has that problem, assuming you know what vim is. Although that may be excusable for neovim if it’s still a work-in-progress targeted only at existing vim users, not yet at the point where it’s interested in pulling in new-to-vim-world users.

            1. 3

              You’re suggesting vim and neovim could work on their ease of adoption? Shocking! :)

              1. 4

                The atom one looks too much like a sales pitch for some kind of PaaS cloud service.

                A website for a product is a sales pitch. Whether or not it’s necessary to have a sales pitch for a free as in beer editor is debatable, though.

                It’s certainly the case that the success of a new editor depends upon adoption. Adoption fuels improvements, extensions, etc which furthers adoption. On the other hand, editors are notoriously “you’ll take it from me from my cold dead hands” types of programs which begs the question as to whether or not the effort of a sales pitch is really worth it. Would it make more sense to spend time showing off the features of it in screencasts for unrelated things? Showing that there are people in the real world using, and benefiting from it? I have a sneaking suspicious that Textmate became as popular as it did because snippets/expansions were featured in all the Rails screencasts at the time, and promised a “zero-hassle”, “types code for you so you don’t have to” experience.

              2. 3

                I agree, but I also think the emacs site redesign reflects emacs “character” if you will. This is one of the things John Wegley talked about when he assumed the maintainer role. He’s a neat guy and I think emacs will benefit from his leadership.

                1. 3

                  From a desktop browser perspective (I haven’t checked them on mobile):

                  The Atom site uses icon fonts which makes it look silly when one configures their browser to not let sites use their own fonts. (This been becoming more and more of a problem with sites using icon fonts.) (Also, there’s good reason to deny sites to use their own fonts which I might get into further in this thread.)

                  The Sublime page expects the user to have JavaScript running to show an animation while they could have just used a picture for their initial presentation. (Again, there’s good reasons to have JavaScript not running by default and people should design their site for it if they’re trying to convey information.)

                  1. 1

                    Also, there’s good reason to deny sites to use their own fonts which I might get into further in this thread.

                    Besides sites taking longer to load or looking ugly (and maybe tracking/privacy issues), I’m not sure what you mean…care to explain?

                    1. 5

                      There have been numerous security vulnerabilities in every platforms font parsing.

                      1. 2

                        Readability. Being able to force your preferred font and minimum and maximum sizes does wonders for readability. Do you remember the “portal website” craze from early this century? Also designers often go crazy with silly fonts that do little to for the readability of the content.

                        Accessibility. Closely linked with readability, being able to force a certain font makes it easier (or even possible) for people with disabilities to read a website.

                        And, lastly, OCD. It makes me happy in the pants to have a desktop all with my preferred font whether it’s my browser, terminal window, text editor, etc.

                  2. 5

                    The tour still links to the old design and a few other links lead to 404s. I suppose it’s not finished yet.

                    Interestingly, if you follow the link to the developer’s site you can see that it originally started out as a darker design: http://nicolas-petton.fr/images/emacs-website.png

                    1. 3

                      Hmm, I think I actually prefer the darker theme. Oh well.

                      1. 1

                        Ah, good find. I was sure I had seen this recently, but couldn’t find the previous discussion for some reason.