a rebuttal to Nielsen’s article entitled “The Beginning of Web Design” in stating the obvious. I think it’s a much more balanced approach to things. [link via heather]
Jakob Nielsen has
published a new Alertbox article, “End of Web Design.” He writes, “Users spend most of their time on other sites. This means that users prefer your site to work the same way as all the other sites they already know.”
No it doesn’t. It means that although each of the sites are different, users don’t mind your particular differences that much, really, and if you keep doing a good job of serving them, you’ll succeed. More – maybe it means that because the sites are different they are successful, because people like diversity, especially when reading or shopping, two things the web is used for extensively.
Followup
on the IAM.com/Razorfish saga: “Our Work’s Fine, Just Pay the Bills“
I may be naive, but I think it’s ridiculous for a dot-com company to farm out their web design work. I can understand a bricks-and-mortar company hiring a company to do pure design work that will be overlaid on a structure they build themselves, or that they have partnered with someone else to do. I can even relate to a strategic partnership with a web company with the latter providing the actual site. But to hire someone straight up like that? I think it invites failure. It’s like a recipe. The knowledge of designers or programmers has to be deeply accounted for by management of a dot-com – it’s an essential piece of the puzzle. Their familiarity with the business model, the history of the project, but from their own unique perspective, is critical. And – the key challenge of a dot-com is just that – to integrate the technical knowledge of designers and programmers and others with the “product” as defined by a deep knowledge of the market, the business proposition, the value to users and to investors/clients. That’s not a casual thing – it’s a mission. I have some understanding of that – it’s a grandiose way of describing a big part of my job.
A portent of things
to come? Razorfish is being sued for what their client thinks was bad, unprofessional web design. “[…] The company delivered (late) a site that was ‘flawed by grave technical and navigational problems.'”
On a whim
I went by a website that used to showcase a dozen ways that European types weren’t quite up-to-date about how to present stuff on the web. That’s changed – the Financial Times website is fantastic. All free – and no reg – the best journalism you’ll find in the world outside of the NYTimes or the Economist – it’s all good. And they toned it down – they used to use their trademark orange as the bgcolor to every page.
In related news: Looks OK, but it’s barely functional. If it looked spectacular that’d be one thing – but on my peppy little frankenstein monster of a computer on ADSL, it doesn’t cut it. Someone at Wallpaper* bought the line that goes, “web design sucks… here, use this all-flash interface.”
- « Previous Page
- 1
- …
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next Page »