The general idea behind Life, Below 600px is an honorable one - namely, users are okay with scrolling a website so you don\'t have to cram everything up \"above the fold.\" After some discussion with Daniel it became clear that the big downfall of the article is that it seems to be saying that \'The Prize\' for the end user should be farther down, persuading them to experience the whole site instead of just the top. This note in particular raises an eyebrow:

Imagine a newspaper squashed all of its quality content on the front page. How disappointed would you be to open the paper to only find the leftovers?

The same happens with your site. If everything of exceptional quality is pushed upon the reader at the beginning, once they start exploring and the rest of the site isn’t of the same calibre, they\'re going to be let down.

The newspaper\'s goal is for you to actually read the newspaper, not just the front page. That should be your goal too.

While I agree that the inner pages of a site / newspaper should be just as content filled as the front page you can\'t make the argument that the most pertinent info shouldn\'t be first. It\'s called The Inverted Pyramid; a writing style where you give the reader all the very important info first and then supplement that with the rest of the article. If you were to think of it as a website, the top would have all the goods and the rest would supplement that; not the inverse.

So, long rant aside, clients and non-web-designers should learn to embrace the ability of a browser to scroll; users are used to it and often think nothing of it. However, hiding your greatest content is a terrible idea.