Putting it bluntly, I see a lot of products out there that I would call hideous. Their functionality is great, but they way they've packaged everything together is quite the opposite. Websites that want to make me puke, reading like a long ass novel, droning on for 5 or more screen heights, with the standard red and black text, rather than segmenting and properly structuring their site, so that features are in one place, testimonials in another, a CTA is visible and in contrast with the surrounding area above the fold etc. User interfaces laden with buttons everywhere like an airplane cockpit, no real help notifications that tell me what I should be doing with a particular form field or button, and when the product breaks; there's no error message explaining what went wrong. It seems however that in internet marketing, these types of things are readily accepted, and I'm not sure whether this is just because the users simply don't care whether they have function with form or function without form, or it's just the way that developers who sell to internet marketers build their products. I'd like to know what you as webmasters and consumers at the same time think about design and form when it comes to internet marketing products. What I would personally consider good, objective website design: The creators of BaseCamp (37signals) are an 8 man company, yet their products are most popular in many of their fields. The founders wrote a book which has testimonials from the likes of; Mark Cuban, Tony Hsieh (Zappos.com founder), William C. Taylor (Fast Company magazine founder). What I would personally consider shit, non-objective website design: This is horrible. The stocky red and black font, reads like a novel. This is a piece of software, yet the seller feels the need to tell a bullshit story to sell it - at least I'd immediately call bullshit (pointers show why). I've spent three years in internet marketing, and this is the norm. Seldom do sellers of internet marketing products go out of there way to really showcase the product their attempting to sell as best as they can, and instead seem to rely purely on the copy (which often smells like bullshit) to sell a product, even if it's a software product which actually has some genuine functionality. I'm wondering though, if this is because such sites actually sell better (I doubt they do), or whether it's just because it's the norm and sellers are complacent about this type of thing (never really bothering to split test straight big block copy vs real structure), but buyers like the product and will buy it in spite of an ugly looking website/trash copy, or another reason entirely. What do you as both webmasters and consumers at the same time think about the subject, and which of the two examples would you prefer to purchase from?