I hate it when people say, “This site is a ripoff of… etc etc,” but I can see a strong correlation between the design of Squarespace’s homepage and this site’s; so much so that I initially thought they were part of the same overall branding.
From the subnav up on the very top to the similar typography for the vivid statement in the header to the placement of the logo to the main navigation on the top right to the charcoal texture in the background, it’s clear to me that the designer heavily borrowed from Squarespace’s aesthetic, and it’s quite distracting.
However, work within the content seems to be of original thought, and I really like some of the stuff I’m seeing there. If only the designer had brought some more of that sense higher up in the page for his/her design, I’d have a little more respect for this design company.
This site is sexy. It resembles some elements of squarespace, but personaly it looks allot nicer and defo isnt a direct copy.
People like foobar get on my nerves, nothing constructive to say at all. They clearly make beautiful websites, so why say anything else? it gets the job done – no need to be different for the sake of it.
The site is nice and clean. Regardless of who or what the site emulates, it is still good. I think many potential clients will appreciate the straight-forward-ness of this site.
Many people leaving comments here are too caught up in a design portal mentality to actually post intelligently and constructively. The fact is that most websites look the same or as though they come from a similar mold. The media industry has been like this since its inception. There is no such thing as a unique snowflake in design.
I’m going to say it’s more than “emulation” or a “similarity”. I’m going to say that it’s a near margin-for-margin straight up ripoff for the header (not just on the homepage either). Did you even compare this site to Squarespace? Here, I did for you:
Text size? Identical.
Logo placement? Identical.
Primary Navigation? Identical.
Secondary Navigation? Identical.
Button placement? Identical.
Promotional wording? Interchangeable.
Color scheme? Identical.
Look at it and decide for yourself, but in the future, I would like for you to really ask yourself if you’re defending the site because you really think it looks different enough to not be categorically defined as a “ripoff”, or if you’re being a contrarian because you think you can “school” us on the real world, swooping in with such groundbreaking street sense as “most websites look the same”.
ha ha @ Roger, what a waste of time!!!! are you saying that logo placement in the left hand corner of a page is solely trademark of squarespace? Same with navigation top right??? + loads of sites use big helvetica font face for large opening intros placed in the exact same place. I see the resemblance of square space i just thinks its a case of building on inspiration. Very nice design – gets the job done!
I had designed the site a long time before i even clapped eyes on the squarespace site, once i had seen it i really liked some of the elements which inspired me to implement on my own site. There is not a single item that is a direct copy!
How can design trends develop if me cant be inspired and build on others work.
If anyone has any doubt regarding my design skills, check my portfolio.
26 Comments
Oh good lord, enough of the “beautiful, hand built/crafted websites” bullshit already!! How about doing something original for a change!
good designs
Attractive design, but I second Foobar’s comment.
There are some weird horizontal scrollbars going on when resizing this thing.
Funny stuff. I agree with Foobar. At least they didn’t use “Hello, my name is…”
I hate it when people say, “This site is a ripoff of… etc etc,” but I can see a strong correlation between the design of Squarespace’s homepage and this site’s; so much so that I initially thought they were part of the same overall branding.
From the subnav up on the very top to the similar typography for the vivid statement in the header to the placement of the logo to the main navigation on the top right to the charcoal texture in the background, it’s clear to me that the designer heavily borrowed from Squarespace’s aesthetic, and it’s quite distracting.
However, work within the content seems to be of original thought, and I really like some of the stuff I’m seeing there. If only the designer had brought some more of that sense higher up in the page for his/her design, I’d have a little more respect for this design company.
Great Design!!
@roger – I agree, it is awfully close to the Squarespace site.
I think it is too much inspired from http://www.squarespace.com/
Agreeing with Foobar, I’m sick of those “Hello, my name is # and I design beautiful websites” or any variation of that.
This site is sexy. It resembles some elements of squarespace, but personaly it looks allot nicer and defo isnt a direct copy.
People like foobar get on my nerves, nothing constructive to say at all. They clearly make beautiful websites, so why say anything else? it gets the job done – no need to be different for the sake of it.
Riddled with typos. Is proofreading not included in the 500 quid?
@Foobar – I agree completely. It’s the most cliche’d thing ever.
Haha, nice horizontal scrollbars.
Smooth and crappy site.
Good to see that Squarespace is expanding to the UK.
The site is nice and clean. Regardless of who or what the site emulates, it is still good. I think many potential clients will appreciate the straight-forward-ness of this site.
Many people leaving comments here are too caught up in a design portal mentality to actually post intelligently and constructively. The fact is that most websites look the same or as though they come from a similar mold. The media industry has been like this since its inception. There is no such thing as a unique snowflake in design.
@Gary
I’m going to say it’s more than “emulation” or a “similarity”. I’m going to say that it’s a near margin-for-margin straight up ripoff for the header (not just on the homepage either). Did you even compare this site to Squarespace? Here, I did for you:
http://img20.yfrog.com/img20/6360/ripoff.jpg
Take a look for yourself at the overlay.
Text size? Identical.
Logo placement? Identical.
Primary Navigation? Identical.
Secondary Navigation? Identical.
Button placement? Identical.
Promotional wording? Interchangeable.
Color scheme? Identical.
Look at it and decide for yourself, but in the future, I would like for you to really ask yourself if you’re defending the site because you really think it looks different enough to not be categorically defined as a “ripoff”, or if you’re being a contrarian because you think you can “school” us on the real world, swooping in with such groundbreaking street sense as “most websites look the same”.
ha ha @ Roger, what a waste of time!!!! are you saying that logo placement in the left hand corner of a page is solely trademark of squarespace? Same with navigation top right??? + loads of sites use big helvetica font face for large opening intros placed in the exact same place. I see the resemblance of square space i just thinks its a case of building on inspiration. Very nice design – gets the job done!
inspired work! not a copy.
I had designed the site a long time before i even clapped eyes on the squarespace site, once i had seen it i really liked some of the elements which inspired me to implement on my own site. There is not a single item that is a direct copy!
How can design trends develop if me cant be inspired and build on others work.
If anyone has any doubt regarding my design skills, check my portfolio.
I agree wityh Gary.
This site is really nice – i think its an improvement on the square space site.
Well Done!!!