[oefrha]

The topic of this thread is whether the website at question is “fast-loading, simple, information-dense and distinctively-styled yet still very readable” compared to today’s mainstream/recommended designs. My take is that information sprinkled in walls of text of dubious value instead of elements that naturally stand out is not readable or actionable at all. If your argument is tech-savvy people should be made to jump through hurdles to download this specific tool, then (1) I don’t agree with this pointless gatekeeping, time wasted is time wasted; (2) you’re not refuting my point.

Also, I can find the download link in maybe 5 seconds, but I bet my father who happens to be an aging software engineer, savvy enough to use this but getting slower, definitely can’t.

[imtringued]

You're making the wrong assumption that getting as many users on board for an aging non-profitable non-core project is actually a goal.

I personally have a project that is in it's early stages and the worst thing that could happen right now is that it goes viral and then I won't be able to work on it at my own pace anymore. Having a user base of 3 people is already tiring enough as it is.

[oefrha]

I’m saying “this is terribly designed.” You’re saying “terribly designed is exactly what they need.” What are you arguing against?