- If you haven't read the article, would you think this site great?
My point is: no one knows what is a great e-commerce website. Is one that sells a lot? Amazon does it.
Is not one that sells a lot, but that is very easy to use?
No, I would have ordered what I wanted, quickly and easily, and probably not thought about the website at all. Which is what makes it great.
If you search HN comments for "McMaster-Carr", you'll see their website is frequently brought up as an example of great UX, going back over 10 years.
I am infuriated when shopping for clothes, computer parts, etc. because the items are rarely categorized and when they are, it isn't comprehensive so searches tend to miss out on the obvious so I end up browsing a site's entire catalog.
And, they do sell a lot. They're the industry standard. The only problem I've had is that they won't ship to individuals in Canada so I had to think up a fake company name.
The author explained why they think it's great, so rather than waving your hands and denying that greatness could ever be defined, what about a constructive approach? Engage with the elements the author identified. Criticize specific ones, or suggest others. Say something you actually believe!
Maybe I didn't express myself very well.
If you don't know what a great ecommerce website is, what is has, what it does, does reading a piece where someone says some site is a great e-commerce website influence your opinion? Does it shape your view?
If so, how does previous literature about the subject influenced the writer?
So, a great e-commerce website should be measured by it's form or by it's results?
Why non functional and not great websites thrive?
Would Jeff Bezos be fixated on those pixels because he believed that as long as amazon.com kept growing and selling, the site must therefore working great?
Those are all sincere questions, not rhetorical or trolling.
What do you think? The article emphasized form and function. You seem to be proposing that results matter. Say that!
Just cobbling together bits of what you're "asking" it seems like you might instead have written the following: "It seems to me that the article focuses on form: simple design, great search and filtering, and useful information like CAD files. But being 'the best e-commerce site' needs to include succeeding at e-commerce. Being very easy to use might help. But there seem to be non functional and not 'great' websites (by the article's definition) that thrive."
Then I talked to regular people (like my friend who builds high-end magic tricks) who happened to use the site and like me wondered why more sites weren't usable like this.
And then after a few years, I saw that people in the comments here and elsewhere thought the same.
And this post is the latest.
I think there's something there.
even if you're not going to buy there (their prices are high, compared to alternative suppliers, is what I've heard, and there are items and brands they don't carry) it's still a super useful reference of what's possible and what general solutions in that area look like and cost, or even just basic lookup for what types of nuts and bolts you should look for in a project. like it's actually just a really nice pleasant interface for working with hardware in general.
I disagree. I know what is a great e-commerce website -- in the sense the article is talking about.
- loads fast
- makes items easy to find quickly
- has a simple, efficient shopping cart mechanism
- gets me in, order placed, and out in the shortest time possible
- is run by a company with great customer service
OTOH I don't know of any serious hobbyists (of whatever) who get the majority of their supplies from Amazon. When you ask, people generally say that selection is poor and quality is always highly suspect.