[jsavimbi]

No, they actually do not.

The visual design is poor enough, not to mention the actual code implementation but the interface itself is even more disjointed and incoherent, using a varied mix of metaphorical elements on the view that have no implied structure, hierarchy or continuity. It's as if each part of the view was designed in isolation without regard for the others.

That turkey wasn't ready to come out of the oven.

[zds]

I'd love to hear your feedback a bit more in-depth, jsavimbi - as mentioned, we do indeed have an in-house designer and design is a big priority for us. We'd love to hear what you think we can do better. Feel free to email us - contact (at) codecademy (dot) com. I'll read every email.

[jsavimbi]

> That turkey wasn't ready to come out of the oven.

Like development, design works best by iteration. The overall concept isn't bad per se, the implementation looks to be haphazard and needs style, tone, ease of use and continuity.

> what you think we can do better

Iterate, iterate, iterate.

[calydon]

Jsavimbi - without specific examples of what you're talking about, I call trolling.

[jsavimbi]

http://michalbures.com/blog/codecademy-how-not-to-do-a-redes...

Michal did a sufficient job of providing examples right there, although I'd caution that very ambitious young man, programmer and designer not to use such an aggressive approach while still an SFSU student, photographer and soon to be entrepreneur (wtf does that mean?).

I call not trolling simply because I agree with the premise that the redesign is half-baked.