In every designer’s career, there will be a client who asks for a website like Apple. Everyone aspires to have a strong digital presence, so it’s no surprise that we find refuge under the umbrella of those who do it best.

在每个设计师的职业生涯中，都会有一个客户要求一个像Apple这样的网站。 每个人都渴望拥有强大的数字化存在，因此，我们在做得最好的人的庇护下找到庇护所也就不足为奇了。

There’s nothing wrong with enjoying simple, flat, and minimal design. But simple, flat, and minimal is not the answer to every question in the universe.

享受简单，扁平和最小的设计没有错。 但是简单，平坦和最小化并不是解决宇宙中每个问题的答案。

Apple, Google, and the other successful tech companies have given us a manual of best practices — a hierarchy of information, clear and organised navigation, high-quality photography, and a call to action fenced in by negative space and white backgrounds.

苹果，谷歌和其他成功的科技公司为我们提供了最佳实践手册-信息层次结构，清晰有序的导航，高质量的摄影作品，以及被负面空间和白色背景所围困的行动号召。

What we tend to forget is that Apple and Google are successful because they design with their own customers in mind, not because they follow a trend. Different audiences respond to different stimuli. Apple’s website is a solution to their business problems; it speaks to their audience. You need to do the same — speak to your own audience in the style they prefer, not in Apple’s. You likely have different goals than Apple does, so why would you copy their implementation?

我们容易忘记的是，苹果和谷歌之所以成功，是因为他们在设计时考虑到了自己的客户，而不是因为他们遵循潮流。 不同的听众对不同的刺激做出React。 苹果公司的网站可以解决他们的业务问题； 它对他们的听众说话。 您需要做同样的事情-以他们喜欢的风格(而不是苹果的风格)与自己的听众交谈。 您可能有与Apple不同的目标，那么为什么要复制其实现？

A successful product is not one that follows a recipe, but one that empathises with customers’ needs and relates to them. And that can only happen if you understand who you’re creating products for. Reality check: it’s unlikely to be Apple’s customers.

成功的产品不是遵循配方的产品，而是能移情客户需求并与之相关的产品。 这只有在您了解要为谁创建产品的情况下才会发生。 现实检查：不太可能成为Apple的客户。

Landing pages with simple visuals often perform well, and so do websites with a ‘typical’ layout. It is tempting to copy this, I get it. But it would be a mistake to ignore the individual character of your audience.

具有简单视觉效果的登录页面通常表现良好，具有“典型”布局的网站也是如此。 我很喜欢复制它。 但是，忽略观众的个性是错误的。

There is no optimal recipe for designing a website. You could have things popping left and right as long as it’s intentional and designed with your customers in mind. Would Apple approve? No. Do they have to? No — because their customers are not your customers. Their business challenges are not your challenges. And what the Minimalism Bandwagon thinks of your website shouldn’t be a factor in your choice.

设计网站没有最佳方法。 只要事情是故意的并且在设计时考虑了您的客户，您就可以左右摇摆。 苹果会批准吗？ 不，他们一定要吗？ 不，因为他们的客户不是您的客户。 他们的业务挑战不是您的挑战。 极简主义潮流对您网站的看法不应该成为您选择的因素。

The goal is never to design a popular and trendy website. No one wakes up in the morning thinking they need to spend $1m on a new site so Awwwards can feature them. Websites are tools; they solve problems. That’s where you should start from. Who are your customers and what is the problem you’re solving for them?

我们的目标绝不是设计一个流行且时尚的网站。 没有人早上醒来，以为他们需要在新网站上花费100万美元，这样Awwwards才可以推荐他们。 网站是工具； 他们解决问题。 那是您应该从哪里开始的。 谁是您的客户，您为他们解决的问题是什么？

Whether minimalism and a grayscale colour scheme solves that problem should be left up to designers to figure out. Saying “I want something like Apple’s website” is expecting the solution to someone else’s problem to fix yours. It’s expecting an umbrella to work in a monsoon in the Philippines just because it does well in a London drizzle. It won’t work, you’ll waste your money, and you’ll look like a fool. Do it the right way — start with your customer and your problem.

极简主义和灰度配色方案是否可以解决该问题，应让设计师自己弄清楚。 说“我想要类似Apple网站的东西”是指解决别人问题的解决方案。 人们期望一把雨伞能在菲律宾的季风中工作，只是因为它在伦敦的细雨中表现良好。 它行不通，您会浪费金钱，而且看起来像个傻瓜。 以正确的方式进行操作-从客户和问题入手。