Image-ine a Site Without Images

User Interface December 06, 2007

What is it about some websites whose makers think that having MORE imagery makes the site MORE usable? Can I just set the record straight here: number of images != amount of usability. They are not directly proportional.

Visual elements are definitely important to any application, but they are not to be relied on to guarantee great interface design. The key - as with most applications - is to find the right balance between the two. Where something can be text instead of an image, use text. Where something must be an image, go ahead and use an image.

Interaction design is focused more on layout than graphics. It's about how you design the positioning of your content. Plenty of websites have extremely minimal graphics, which declutters everything and allows for greater usability. Look at Google, whose interfaces are completely bare, save for the occasional colored horizontal rule.

I think Marissa Mayer said it best when she described Google's UI:"All of us on the UI team think the value of Google is in not being cluttered, in offering a great user experience. I like to say that Google should be 'what you want, when you want it' as opposed to 'everything you could ever want, even when you don't.'"

Other User Interface Posts