I was reading an interesting story about how Netflix (one of my favorite services) is going to start downloading rentals directly to set-top devices hooked to your TV. Great idea, but what really caught my eye was the quote from Reed Hastings, Netflix CEO and founder:
“It (the set-top device) is going to be very slick and easy,” said Reed Hastings, Netflix’s chief executive officer. “We want the TV experience to be very relaxing and not like visiting a Web site.”
What struck me about Hasting’s quote is how he casually damned all of the web in one swift stroke. Apparently, the web is neither “slick and easy” nor relaxing. Is it really that bad?
No related posts.
I’m wondering if we’re reading it wrong. It could just be a case of badly placed punctuation. Maybe he wants it to be slick and easy, and not feel as though you’re using your tv to get to a web site; the way we’re reading it, he says it’ll be slick and easy unlike using a website.
Just a thought.
I’m wondering if we’re reading it wrong. It could just be a case of badly placed punctuation. Maybe he wants it to be slick and easy, and not feel as though you’re using your tv to get to a web site; the way we’re reading it, he says it’ll be slick and easy unlike using a website.
Just a thought.
That is exactly how I read it as well (slick and easy, unlike a website). This is what troubles me. Are websites that bad? Is it impossible to make a website that is slick, easy and stress-free? Hastings seems to imply that it is.
I will agree that most websites are considerably more complex than they need to be. We (web publishers) need to learn a thing or two from (the better) TV interfaces, where the options are limited and attention is focused on the task at hand (usually finding and watching a program).
The trouble is, most websites don’t bother to consider what the actionable task is! Instead, they attempt to be a portal or a sort of “mission control” for everything. Maybe… just maybe… we need to simplify things.
That is exactly how I read it as well (slick and easy, unlike a website). This is what troubles me. Are websites that bad? Is it impossible to make a website that is slick, easy and stress-free? Hastings seems to imply that it is.
I will agree that most websites are considerably more complex than they need to be. We (web publishers) need to learn a thing or two from (the better) TV interfaces, where the options are limited and attention is focused on the task at hand (usually finding and watching a program).
The trouble is, most websites don’t bother to consider what the actionable task is! Instead, they attempt to be a portal or a sort of “mission control” for everything. Maybe… just maybe… we need to simplify things.
No, I think what he meant was that he wants it to feel as though you’re using a tv, not a computer. He doesn’t want it to look like a typical website (good or bad) – he wants it to look like a non-web interface. Like when you switch on your tv and use the digital channel guide… that’s slick and easy and not like a website.
That doesn’t mean websites aren’t slick and easy, but websites don’t generally look or feel like the interface employed by the channel channel.
No, I think what he meant was that he wants it to feel as though you’re using a tv, not a computer. He doesn’t want it to look like a typical website (good or bad) – he wants it to look like a non-web interface. Like when you switch on your tv and use the digital channel guide… that’s slick and easy and not like a website.
That doesn’t mean websites aren’t slick and easy, but websites don’t generally look or feel like the interface employed by the channel channel.