even in building a slick, new, innovative startup, you're rarely striking out into purely uncharted, untouched territory. (for example, if you use a framework, a big chunk of your code will look exactly the same as a lot of others out there). odds are you're just taking solutions and concepts that previous people have pioneered and combining them in an new/innovative way, possibly throwing in a unique idea/element or two into the mix.
whats wrong with doing the same with respect to design?
I don't like the example. Facebook is a master of interactive design, and is pushing the envelope of large-scale AJAX design while remaining surprisingly agile. Twitter is just a utility.
Regardless of how you feel about Twitter, the example is still applicable. To anyone who uses both, it is very obvious that the the latest version of the Facebook home page is very much inspired by the Twitter home page. Facebook has certainly added it's own touches to that concept, but it's hard to deny the influence that Twitter has had on Facebook.
With that said, I concur that Facebook does interactive design very well. They are a good source for inspiration for your own applications.
even in building a slick, new, innovative startup, you're rarely striking out into purely uncharted, untouched territory. (for example, if you use a framework, a big chunk of your code will look exactly the same as a lot of others out there). odds are you're just taking solutions and concepts that previous people have pioneered and combining them in an new/innovative way, possibly throwing in a unique idea/element or two into the mix.
whats wrong with doing the same with respect to design?