Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
-= sequoia capital =- (tlrobinson.net)
150 points by jasonlbaptiste on Aug 19, 2009 | hide | past | favorite | 45 comments


This is actually more informative than their current site!


And at least on par with their last site as I remember


It's a webpage from the future! All of the tags are lowercase and some of them have these "style=" attributes with some weird programming language in them!


Fantastic. Their new site is ridiculous "look how trendy we are".


I actually think their site is pretty cool / innovative.


Seriously?! If search engines had AI, I can see it being cool/innovative. With the current state of search technology, it's a usability disaster.

Problem #1 - language. Is their portfolio page called "portfolio"? Or "companies we've invested in?" Is their contact page called "contact"? Or "Get in touch?" Do they have a blog? Searching for "blog" seems to indicate that they don't-- unless it's called something other than "blog". Search is hard and they are making their users play "guess the right search query" when a scan/browse action would be easier and less error prone.

Problem #2 - scan-ability. So say I AM interest in learning more about their portfolio. Roughly what types of companies do they back (what's the search query to answer that question?)? What have they backed most recently (again, what search query?)? Who works there (a search for partners suggests "Energy (partners)")? Scanning is a huge part of web behavior.

Problem #3 - discoverability. What about what I'm NOT searching for? They have some GREAT content around how to pitch VCs, what ideas are VC-worthy, etc. With a content-free page, there is a 0% chance of me learning about stuff that I didn't know I was looking for.

Problem #4 - SPELLING. Take a look at their partner page (if you can find it). Are there any names there that you might have trouble spelling/searching for if you heard it at a dinner party last night?

We don't have to guess with usability. What they SHOULD have done is write down 5 tasks that people might do at their site and had a few friends run a few informal tests.

I'm willing to turn in my UX designer badge if my guess is wrong and this UI increases task performance speed and reduces errors.

Hrm, as I consider it-- I guess your comment doesn't dispute all that. It probably can be cool, innovative, AND a usability disaster.


A colleague of mine wrote about agencies moving to this odd, search-style site a few months back:

http://www.newmediacampaigns.com/page/big-ad-agency-websites...

It just doesn't make any sense. It's not even trendy.


Doesn't validate, you have a </P> tag - what is that? Everyone knows you don't close your <P> tags.

What's that extra slash after the BR and HR?

And </li>?? Since when?

Where did you learn to program HTML?

:)


Sheesh, sorry. I fixed it, per your suggestions. Also, all tags and attributes are capitalized, and there's no quotes around attribute values.


I can understand submitting this link to Digg / Reddit / 4Chan.

But why here? It's nonsense


Yah, it does seem that way.

It's actually a list of companies that Sequoia Capitol has invested in. So it's sort of an in joke given the startup focus this site has.


It was actually inspired by this comment: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=772027


Needs more blink.


Apparently the BLINK tag doesn't actually work in some modern browsers, so I had to reimplement it in JavaScript. If you'd like to use it on your own site, here's the code:

    var blinkOn = 1;
    window.setInterval(function() {
        var blinks = document.getElementsByTagName("blink");
        for (var i = 0; i < blinks.length; i++)
            blinks[i].style.visibility = blinkOn ? "visible" : "hidden";
        blinkOn ^= 1;
    }, 500);


Just a small note - you should not explicitly set the visibility to "visible", set it to the empty string "" instead. This way you don't overwrite the default property if it was something else.

And you can skip the blinkOn variable by:

  blinks[i].style.visibility = blinks[i].style.visibility == "" ? "hidden" : "";


That's actually way slower because you're doing a comparison within an iteration. That's putting an if statement inside a loop while the result is the same for every iteration.


Computers are not that slow these days :)

It reduces complexity and a global, which is far more important.

And that blink loop is probably not that big - just how many blink tags do you have?

I don't use it for blink loops anyway, I use it for toggle on/off, where keeping state for each element individually is pretty important.


You're accessing the DOM every iteration, so I'd bet that it does matter somewhat if blink is used a lot.

You can avoid polluting by make it an actual function and then setting the function.blinkOn instead.

You're right: individually swapping them this works better, but the intent is to have them all off or all on.

  (function() {
    var blinkIterator = function() {
        var blinks = document.getElementsByTagName("blink"),
         onOff = blinkIterator.blinkOn ? "" : "hidden";
        for (var i = 0, l = blinks.length; i < l;)
            blinks[i++].style.visibility = onOff;
        blinkIterator.blinkOn ^= 1;
    };
    blinkIterator.blinkOn = 1;
    window.setInterval(blinkIterator, 750);
  })();


Well played, sir.


You don't need all that complexity. just use CSS:

text-decoration: blink

Works in FF 3.5


Well, no. Browsers that don't support "blink" tags also don't support "text-decoration: blink".

I'd hardly call it complex either.


And copy/pasted DHTML snowflake effects.



Where the marquee at??


Wow, I really miss the days of black text on a gray background. * sniff


Expect it to make a glorious comeback because of OLEDs: http://static.arstechnica.com/amoled.jpg

source: http://arst.ch/60n


Man I love that under construction animated gif.

That was a standard on all sites for so many years...


yeah, because really, when is a site not under construction??


No <marquee>? I'm disappointed.


Might not work in all browsers, but check your status bar.


It could definitely use a "this site best viewed with Mosaic 1.0" or something to that effect.


And a visitor counter.


Look at the status bar!


The top text blinks.... Plus 1000 points



OMG so hilarious!

Budd Ugly is a classic of web design parody, except that my buddy (a hypertext legend) thought it was a real site!


Wow, trendy stuff. I'm going to have to start using that window.status trick they're using.


Many more of those companies should have gotten the "Cool" animated gif...


Awesome, but is there a reason 'capital' is misspelled 'capitol'?


Was spelling capital wrong part of the parody too?


Yes.


needs a bright green background to emphasize the tree connection.


What, and lose Netscape 1.0 support?


Also missing the punch-the-monkey banner.


I lol'd.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: