I like the comment on the original site:

"God damn it, this is not OCD. Being anal has nothing to do with OCD and vice versa"

I don't see OCD behaviour in the design either - they are not tweaks, they are quite different iterations. I'm not sure it's even anal as such - more like experimental (and if they don't settle soon, indecisive).

I'll be first to admit that I was experimenting with more catchy titles. My apologies to those who were mislead.

Is he going to write a blog post about his co-founder's obsessive attention to titles?

On a more serious note he needs to do a bit of tweaking with the contrast - the thin pale grey text doesn't stand out well against a white background on my monitor and the tagline below the logo is virtually unreadable.

FWIW I also think slide 8 is a cleaner design than the current iteration - the logo in the finished version looks a bit squashed and I think the left hand menu is more distracting than it needs to be.

And you made the front page, I think you nailed it :)

Using "obsessive co-founder" instead would have probably been fine. Still, you meant no harm. :)

If it's any consolation, I like the final iteration the most.

At the risk of being down-voted, does anyone else see the irony in that comment?

"Emulation has been scientifically proven to be the most powerful learning device known to man."

Has this really been proven? I notice I learn best when trying to reproduce examples, but I didn't know this was a "thing." Is this just hyperbole, or does anyone have a citation?

Hyperbole :)

The designs are each unique enough that I wouldn't call them iterations or tweaking, but exploration of different ideas, which — especially for mockups — is normal in design.

It's been deleted or moved, I take it?

I still see the post and the site referenced.

heh. It's a startup trying to tap the REAL VIDEO STREAMING market.

seriously?

what do you mean?