<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Testing a new website design</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.alwinhoogerdijk.com/2009/04/20/testing-a-new-website-design/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.alwinhoogerdijk.com/2009/04/20/testing-a-new-website-design/</link>
	<description>Software Marketing, Adwords, SEO, Email Marketing, A/B Split testing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 23:18:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Don Robinson</title>
		<link>http://www.alwinhoogerdijk.com/2009/04/20/testing-a-new-website-design/comment-page-1/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Robinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 10:54:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alwinhoogerdijk.com/?p=178#comment-24</guid>
		<description>I think the new version is more likely to keep visitors on the page longer. The four main pictures on version 1 aren&#039;t that interesting, and give the visitor enough information in a few seconds to leave early. Version 2, makes you think &quot;who&#039;s this guy with the bookcase&quot; and they have to read the text to find out. The text establishes you as a collector of DVDs and games etc, like them, so I would think they are willing to spend more time on the page to find what you have to say. I&#039;ve just started looking at bounce rates for my site, and 80% of visitors leave within 10 seconds. As my program lists Windows files, I don&#039;t think I could have a picture of me with my 250,000 files, so I&#039;ll have to think of other ways to keep their interest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the new version is more likely to keep visitors on the page longer. The four main pictures on version 1 aren&#8217;t that interesting, and give the visitor enough information in a few seconds to leave early. Version 2, makes you think &#8220;who&#8217;s this guy with the bookcase&#8221; and they have to read the text to find out. The text establishes you as a collector of DVDs and games etc, like them, so I would think they are willing to spend more time on the page to find what you have to say. I&#8217;ve just started looking at bounce rates for my site, and 80% of visitors leave within 10 seconds. As my program lists Windows files, I don&#8217;t think I could have a picture of me with my 250,000 files, so I&#8217;ll have to think of other ways to keep their interest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alwin</title>
		<link>http://www.alwinhoogerdijk.com/2009/04/20/testing-a-new-website-design/comment-page-1/#comment-14</link>
		<dc:creator>Alwin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 18:07:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alwinhoogerdijk.com/?p=178#comment-14</guid>
		<description>Yes, I am changing lots of stuff in one go. Sometimes that is the only way to do it. In this case the changes belong together, so it wouldn&#039;t be possible to test them one by one.

I mean, giving the testimonials this prominent screen estate wouldn&#039;t have been possible without moving the buy boxes down.

Another reason to do more changes at once is to make them more measurable. The effect of some of the changes I made here would be negligible when tested on their own.

I agree that it is harder to find the Buy buttons now. In fact, I think that is the biggest risk I am taking here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I am changing lots of stuff in one go. Sometimes that is the only way to do it. In this case the changes belong together, so it wouldn&#8217;t be possible to test them one by one.</p>
<p>I mean, giving the testimonials this prominent screen estate wouldn&#8217;t have been possible without moving the buy boxes down.</p>
<p>Another reason to do more changes at once is to make them more measurable. The effect of some of the changes I made here would be negligible when tested on their own.</p>
<p>I agree that it is harder to find the Buy buttons now. In fact, I think that is the biggest risk I am taking here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Oliver Grahl</title>
		<link>http://www.alwinhoogerdijk.com/2009/04/20/testing-a-new-website-design/comment-page-1/#comment-13</link>
		<dc:creator>Oliver Grahl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.alwinhoogerdijk.com/?p=178#comment-13</guid>
		<description>You change many factors at once here... One major difference is the Buy Now boxes being above/below the &#039;fold&#039;. Wouldn&#039;t it be better to change one thing at a time? My bet is version #2, because it has more personality. But your visitors will have a hard time finding the Buy button on #2...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You change many factors at once here&#8230; One major difference is the Buy Now boxes being above/below the &#8216;fold&#8217;. Wouldn&#8217;t it be better to change one thing at a time? My bet is version #2, because it has more personality. But your visitors will have a hard time finding the Buy button on #2&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
