Your App’s Website Sucks | Hacker News Reader

Your App’s Website Sucks

mattgemmell.com

87 pointsnirmal21 comments

Matt makes some good points.

However, he doesn't seem to touch on the most important thing - most users don't go and look at websites before downloading apps.

My website is reasonably good and I also released a couple of #1 apps (in the News and Finance categories), but the website played a fairly small role in the success of those apps.

I don't think I've ever even looked at an app's website before I've bought one, and I don't really want to. If someone does a good job with their documentation in the app store listing itself, especially with the screen shots, then that's usually all I need.

While this is true of mobile (ie iPhone apps) I get the feeling the article is more aimed at desktop apps, where I think the advice makes more sense (as there is no App Store).

I should have mentioned that my apps are iPhone apps.

You're correct in saying that his advice makes more sense for desktop apps. However, he doesn't say that and the only store he explicitly mentions in the blog post is the iPhone/iPad app store.

That said, I think that the website will probably be more important for a $99 mobile app than it is for a $0.99 mobile app.

I think his entire "Priority 2: TRY" makes it quite clear that he has other platforms than iOS in mind. :)

Since a lot of people seem to be misunderstanding: When Matt says "apps," he doesn't mean "iPhone apps." He's just talking about software applications in general, with a focus on the desktop in fact.

Mac users were using the word "app" long before Apple co-opted it for the iPhone, and this is the culture Matt comes from.

Patrick McKenzie's advice is also quite good (and contradictory in some ways): http://www.kalzumeus.com/2009/08/06/landing-page-design-tips...

Keep in mind that a homepage is not a landing page. The homepage serves many masters, the landing page -- on the other hand -- is laser targeted at moving a prospect who you know one very salient data point about exactly one step further in their relationship with you.

I'd point out the differences between my home page and landing page for you, but honestly I have so many tests going on right now I'm not sure what you'd be seeing.

A small plea from this humble user, if you include a Twitter link: I love that you let me follow your prospective and released updates using Twitter rather than the slew of RSS feeds and newsletters for a plethora of other apps I also use, but I will unfollow the profile in a heartbeat if I see three tweets from your company every day - particularly if they are retweeted testimonials; God dammit I hate them.

At the very least, find out what and who your Twitter profile is for and don't fit all the things Twitter can be used for into that one account; you can always divvy yourselves up into multiple profiles.

This is excellent advice and is actually one of the easiest ways to get an App website up quickly. Our app site took about 30 minutes to get up (http://www.losttribeapps.com/), once we had the description written. You can't go wrong with a front-and-center "Install Now" button, a 1-sentence description and a bunch of screenshots.

Personally, I use screenshots alone to judge the app, or product, or program, or whatever.

It reminds me of IRC: people tend to abstractly explain and talk about their code, rather than just pasting the code itself. Same thing with screenshots: for almost all apps, screenshots is the most 1:1 description there is.

OK, be honest with me, does my voice suck on my app screencast & does my website make sense?

http://most-advantageous.com/optimal-layout

All feedback is appreciated.

No obvious information on what platform your software is for. The only hint that it's Mac-only is that you got that MacUser award.

Looks pretty obvious to me. My first reaction was "I'm not a Mac user, I don't want this"

Well, sorry I couldn't be the third datapoint.

App sites should have what they can't show on the app browser (video, hi-res screenshots, etc...). But I honestly don't see the point of spending lots of time on a site for it.

Much of this is applicable beyond apps and into browser addons and software in general.

So I'm thinking with these aggregators (reddit, HN, digg) you get a lot more clicks if you say "you" "your" in your title. It think it's kind of manipulative.

"Only you can prevent forrest fires"

Eh.

The joke is on Matt: I don't have an app website.

I hope HN doesn't embrace this sensational tone of headline.

When I see a headline like this I automatically reduce my expectation and increase my quality bar for pressing that little grey triangle.

Not that I think this is a bad article, I'm just unconvinced that it lives up to its patronising headline.

And because of that, I read the HN comments rather than the article (or at least to get an idea of whether the article itself is worth reading).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com