The year was 1998. Google had one goal: to create a search engine for the world.
They weren’t the first company to launch a search engine. Far from it. In the previous years, numerous other companies had launched various search engines that were already being used.
It wasn’t long before Google’s search engine became a leader in the industry, though. Users remarked on how easy it was to use Google for internet search. The homepage was so simple, so clean, and it delivered exactly what people wanted.
On the surface, the design looks incredibly basic. There are only a few things on the page, and its design almost seems like a no-brainer. But underneath that simple design was a lot of planning, systems, and just saying “no.”
For Google, that meant saying no to suggestions made by numerous employees and customers. Engineers would bring up ideas that could be added to the home page, while Google surveys indicated that users thought it would be a good idea to have more results per page.
But putting more options brings along negative consequences, such as longer load times and reduced user satisfaction. So Google decided to place tight restrictions on what could and couldn’t be added.
Whenever an engineer suggested a new feature for the search, it would first be placed on the advanced search page and evaluated on ease of use. Even then, Google would test vigorously to weed out any unnecessary complexity.
Over a series of tests, Google’s system gave them the knowledge and experience to make the best decisions for the company in the long run.
In a sea of competitors, Google stood out for giving its users less instead of more.
The Dilution Effect
So often we think that having more is better. More functions, more features, more conveniences.
But in the process, we over complicate. The primary problem that an object intended to solve gets lost. Instead of making something easier or better, the need to add more ends up making us confused or distracted, which defeats the initial purpose behind a product.