<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Style vs. Substance</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thefuturebuzz.com/2010/04/26/style-vs-substance/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thefuturebuzz.com/2010/04/26/style-vs-substance/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=style-vs-substance</link>
	<description>Adam Singer on digital marketing and online PR</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 22:19:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Justin Bartlett</title>
		<link>http://thefuturebuzz.com/2010/04/26/style-vs-substance/#comment-28394</link>
		<dc:creator>Justin Bartlett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Apr 2010 08:38:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thefuturebuzz.com/?p=6942#comment-28394</guid>
		<description>Ah yes, functionality versus wow factor; As the web evolves, content is rapidly the king; just a couple of years ago almost all the sites on the web were flash and image heavy, now google has incorportated site loading speed in their ranking algorithm.. Its awesome how the web continuously evolves and changes.  It&#039;s great when webmasters achieve that perfect zen or balance between content and creation; this &quot;web zen&quot; for lack of a better term usually it manifests itself in great use of color balance and typography, low use of images.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah yes, functionality versus wow factor; As the web evolves, content is rapidly the king; just a couple of years ago almost all the sites on the web were flash and image heavy, now google has incorportated site loading speed in their ranking algorithm.. Its awesome how the web continuously evolves and changes.  It&#8217;s great when webmasters achieve that perfect zen or balance between content and creation; this &#8220;web zen&#8221; for lack of a better term usually it manifests itself in great use of color balance and typography, low use of images.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kristin Currier</title>
		<link>http://thefuturebuzz.com/2010/04/26/style-vs-substance/#comment-28388</link>
		<dc:creator>Kristin Currier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:38:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thefuturebuzz.com/?p=6942#comment-28388</guid>
		<description>Everyone tries so hard to define style, but most fail miserably at it. Everyone wants it, but go about attaining it in the wrong ways. Content defines style, form follows function. What your content is and who your audience is dictates the style -or visual brand- you assume. I think the mistake many make, and you point it out here...is to go for the bling first, and hope it masks the lack of substance. Savvy people lose patience, and leave.
I work in eCommerce and deal exclusively with visual content. I consider my job creative, but ultimately, I&#039;m here to sell stuff online. So, it&#039;s got to look good. My company sells really nice, expensive product, and our customers are educated, well-off people. I know what they expect to see. I understand that if our product photography looks crappy and our graphic visuals look amateur, it cheapens our brand, and our customers won&#039;t trust what we are trying to sell them.
Another mistake people make is too much style and not enough usability. There&#039;s nothing more annoying than a design-heavy website that is hard to use. Jakob Nielsen has been fighting that fight for some time now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Everyone tries so hard to define style, but most fail miserably at it. Everyone wants it, but go about attaining it in the wrong ways. Content defines style, form follows function. What your content is and who your audience is dictates the style -or visual brand- you assume. I think the mistake many make, and you point it out here&#8230;is to go for the bling first, and hope it masks the lack of substance. Savvy people lose patience, and leave.</p>
<p>I work in eCommerce and deal exclusively with visual content. I consider my job creative, but ultimately, I&#8217;m here to sell stuff online. So, it&#8217;s got to look good. My company sells really nice, expensive product, and our customers are educated, well-off people. I know what they expect to see. I understand that if our product photography looks crappy and our graphic visuals look amateur, it cheapens our brand, and our customers won&#8217;t trust what we are trying to sell them. </p>
<p>Another mistake people make is too much style and not enough usability. There&#8217;s nothing more annoying than a design-heavy website that is hard to use. Jakob Nielsen has been fighting that fight for some time now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Singer</title>
		<link>http://thefuturebuzz.com/2010/04/26/style-vs-substance/#comment-28387</link>
		<dc:creator>Adam Singer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:03:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thefuturebuzz.com/?p=6942#comment-28387</guid>
		<description>Hey - that was a compliment to you and Scoble!  You guys are so good, you rock it without a flashy theme :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey &#8211; that was a compliment to you and Scoble!  You guys are so good, you rock it without a flashy theme :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Louis Gray</title>
		<link>http://thefuturebuzz.com/2010/04/26/style-vs-substance/#comment-28386</link>
		<dc:creator>Louis Gray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 16:00:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thefuturebuzz.com/?p=6942#comment-28386</guid>
		<description>You have failed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have failed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aman Sharma</title>
		<link>http://thefuturebuzz.com/2010/04/26/style-vs-substance/#comment-28385</link>
		<dc:creator>Aman Sharma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Apr 2010 15:24:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thefuturebuzz.com/?p=6942#comment-28385</guid>
		<description>Nice post.
In business, ideal mix of substance and style is required to appropriately address various market segments. For example, a mobile company targeting basic cellphone segment (entry level) offers less features (lower substance) but would try to make up with style.
Do you recall Iridium phones, the first satellite phones ever launched? They were high on substance but were so bulky and unwieldy that carrying them proved to be embarrassing (low on style)! The product failed (though not entirely for this reason)
Twitter id ; @amancool5</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice post.</p>
<p>In business, ideal mix of substance and style is required to appropriately address various market segments. For example, a mobile company targeting basic cellphone segment (entry level) offers less features (lower substance) but would try to make up with style. </p>
<p>Do you recall Iridium phones, the first satellite phones ever launched? They were high on substance but were so bulky and unwieldy that carrying them proved to be embarrassing (low on style)! The product failed (though not entirely for this reason)</p>
<p>Twitter id ; @amancool5</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

