SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 43 of 43
  1. #26
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    Port Jervis, NY, US
    Posts
    163
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think I'm noticing a more complex use of colored tables in place of large amount of graphics. The appeal of minimal download time is obvious, if you can pull it off aesthetically.

  2. #27
    ComDude CryingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I don't know the cat drug it in!!!
    Posts
    247
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Personally,,, having been on the web since Netscape 1.1 etc... I have been seeing quite a few trends... When I started minimalism was all there was, really, you could get some graphics on a page but really no sites had much... Of course 14.4k thru 28.8 modems were the norm and 33.6 to 56k where just coming into being...

    Although, there were more then one browser (mosaic etc) then most people used Netscape as their stock was up to $90 bucks a share in like a week or two...

    <HTML 2.0 spec in like the end of 1994 or so>

    So doing WebPages was easy you just designed for Netscape and put a little button on your page that said "get Netscape now" <CENTER>was a Netscape tag</CENTER> etc...

    Then Internet Explorer came out cuz Netscape wouldn't be bought out by Big old Bill...

    <BLINK>This site is blink free</BLINK>

    WHAT A MESS!!!!!!!!! Both browsers were trying to set the standards and none would even listen to things like a "standards committee" Both browsers did everything different and the other wouldn't support this and that etc... btw who really set all the standards??? Not a committee!!! They were to busy just playing catch-up!!!

    Tables were just used for well tables... then some nut or guru came up with a cool way of using tables to help with page layout,,, you didn't have any real control over page layout then the guy with the browser on his machine had most of the control... This one hit home when I went over to a friends house and told him to look at my first webpage. He had changed all the colors in his browser to what he wanted so my site just looked like muck!!!

    I remember when frames were first introduced "what a mess" really I wish I had a copy of CalWeb's website then... they had, no kidding like 15+ frames on a page!!! all with their own scroll bar or two!!!

    <FRAMESET>"This site is frame free!!!!" </FRAMESET>

    Don't you hate when someone uses frames to external links from his site and you have this other new site in a little frame??? Just sick!!!

    Then like the first guru that created some layout stuff using tables and nested tables,,, some people where doing some really killer stuff (then ruining it with a bunch of click HEREs - sorry personal tirade)

    click <A>here</A> to see no more click heres

    I do like the trend that is flowing toward faster loading sites... Is this minimalism??? I don't really think so. I don't really think we need to go that extreme...

    Why you may ask??? Well I don't really work in designing WebPages although I really enjoy design and have had a few offers... I will be doing some design work part-time when time permits etc... I work for Lucent Technologies and we are currently and have been working on the "Network Backbone" to improve data through put...

    I was doing a frame relay upgrade in a GTE telephone office this last week and I was talking to the COT (Central office tech) there... These where "small" farming towns that are offering people DSL service in their community... Like now the cows can browse the Internet at better then 56k and upwards to 6 megabit!!! I currently use cable modem and average 2-3Mb

    So do I think this trend will hold??? I hope so but really as the more of you that get off the 56k which is really 28 to 48 or so, the trend for more mulitmedia and graphics will go up!!! and again we will be working on the backbone as usual...

    body { background:#000000; color:#000000 }
    HEY, WHO TURNED OUT THE LIGHTS?!?
    Easy come easy go!!!
    CryingWolf

  3. #28
    ComDude CryingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I don't know the cat drug it in!!!
    Posts
    247
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Oh and a big trend <Just to slow you down> banner ads!!! </Just to slow you down> Yep I remember there where no banner ads back then and I remember how it seemed that sites were getting slower cuz they added a banner ad!!! Ok you do get use to it and now I don't really notice anymore,,, besides how else can we make money off the net without doing porn???
    body { background:#000000; color:#000000 }
    HEY, WHO TURNED OUT THE LIGHTS?!?
    Easy come easy go!!!
    CryingWolf

  4. #29
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    46
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yup, there is a difference between fast loading sites and minimalism. Most minimalism I see is in print. Most web sites are too full, IMHO. Cluttered. Trying to do too much at once.

    That said, the good trend is that pages are getting faster to load, even as there's more stuff on them. (Of course, with a cable modem, nothing really takes THAT long. Unless the cable is acting like dialup, which is often does. But that's a whole 'nother thread...)

    m.

  5. #30
    Fluffy Kitten Programmer~ Elledan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,356
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I, too, think that minimalism is the way to go. Especially for sites who offer loads of information in text-form (articles) this is just necessary.

    Note: I try to avoid using images who are unnecessary, so for the design I only use transparant .gif's to get the right table-width and some graphics to create rounded corners. That's all. And with those rounded corners being around 200-500 bytes, the extra loading time is barely noticable.

    Simplicity.
    www.nyanko.ws - My web-, software- and game development company.
    www.mayaposch.com - My personal site and blog.

  6. #31
    SitePoint Enthusiast smirk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    gibraltar ... for now...
    Posts
    60
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Re: Nielsen


    I would say no.

    Sites are never going to go away from graphics and making it look good. Simple reason is that the casual surfer likes having a pleasant surfing experience.. not reading a newspaper. I used to buy into the Nielsen thing but seriously folks, the web is a whole new medium with countless possibilities, to treat it as similar to other mediums would be criminal.

    The thing is, now sites arent going overboard with graphics anymore becuase if you cant load it, you cant see it, and if you're trying to sell something you cant.

    Likewise if you try to sell something on just text, you wont either when your competitor has pictures and other features of it.

    I say there is more awareness out there now on merging style with substance, rather than a overload of one. (speaking of style with no substance.. anyone see the Puff Daddy site? Terrible, but how much substance could there be on Puff Daddy?)

    Sorry.. tangent.. I like swooshes too. Use them a lot...

    btw.. how do you get those smiley face like icons on the posting????

  7. #32
    SitePoint Wizard TWTCommish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    http://www.sitepointforums.com/index...on=showsmilies

    That will explain it to you.

    Minimalism and Nielsen's teachings are two different things - you can design a nice, smooth, quick loading site without too many images all over the place and still go against what he says.

    Nielsen says we shouldn't have images really - logos should be made of text. Anyone here care to actually agree with that, and back it up with a site in where they've done so?

    Nielsen takes an old web design cliche "Keep it simple, stupid", and takes it to extremes so that his site is virtually the only one that follows it.

  8. #33
    ComDude CryingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I don't know the cat drug it in!!!
    Posts
    247
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I would have to ask Mr. Nielson, "What the hell you been smoking???" And for all the ones that agree with him, "crack is bad for your heath!!!" Simply put a picture is worth a 1000 words!!! Now I can write a 1000 words on how to hook up your network or write a 100 words and then give you a pic. Which do you prefer??? Imagine putting the kids swing set together with only words for the instuctions!?!

    (Step 654 - Put part J85483-E lug bolt through second hole on right end of part J84839-2 while facing you with left side facing right... Warning do not put part J85483-E into second hole facing left or swing set may fly apart during use!!!)

    I would just hope for the trend toward faster code, faster graphics, and maybe simpler site, ie. don't do it all on one page, holds true. Then we have the best of all camps!!!

    <soapbox>ME</soapbox>

    late
    body { background:#000000; color:#000000 }
    HEY, WHO TURNED OUT THE LIGHTS?!?
    Easy come easy go!!!
    CryingWolf

  9. #34
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Nashville TN
    Posts
    11
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the biggest thing is to focus on the subject matter of the website. For instance a big news site offering news should be simple and to the point, but someone trying to sell a product or service should make thier product or service look as good as they possibly can. For example who would hire a webdesigner who had an entire portfolio of text based graphics and websites.

    The trend i try to follow is to keep things attractive and change it often, and hopefully the surfer will not get bored.

    Doni
    Doni Ronquillo
    Need Free Website Graphics
    http://www.freewebtemplates.com

  10. #35
    Gong!
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Helsinki, Finland
    Posts
    229
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by TWTCommish
    http://www.sitepointforums.com/index...on=showsmilies

    That will explain it to you.

    Nielsen says we shouldn't have images really - logos should be made of text. Anyone here care to actually agree with that, and back it up with a site in where they've done so?
    Of course we should have images, just remember the old phrase: "One image is more than thousand words" if it's on a right place and it actual meaning behind it can be expressed better with it, but just look at those flash sites and so called "cool design".

    If I'm looking for information I really would like to have, I don't want to wait to see how "cool" that page looks just to notice that the designer though that my browser/computer isn't enough to get that piece of info That does suck.

    Sure, it is easy to say "get a new computer", but that isn't always an option.

    Though, you should also read Nielsen's column When Bad Design Elements Become the Standard, where he says: "The fact is, no website is seen in isolation: users come to your site expecting things to work the same way they are already used to." which can be basically translated to that do what others do.

    Nielsen's recommendations aren't laws, but they do make actually sense - more information you are about to offer, more likely I would personally recommend to read those and learn. Perhaps you find the right mixture in your design, which "doesn't look ugly and old" and has some degree of usability and accessibility too.

    Nielsen takes an old web design cliche "Keep it simple, stupid", and takes it to extremes so that his site is virtually the only one that follows it.
    That is actually a good rule. More you clutter a page, less the actual information catches the user's eye.

    .. and you haven't seen many sites yet, if you claim that his site is the only one. I know that you mean that there are very few of them, true, but they actually have something offer, unlike many other "cool" sites with cluttered pages and heavy graphics (no, I don't say that nicely designed pages with good bit of content don't exist).

    Why make it hard, inaccessible and hard to use when you can keep it simple, stupid.

  11. #36
    SitePoint Wizard TWTCommish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well, seeing as how the same information is likely found on ten other websites apart from your own, you have to look into other ways of getting people to come to your site: one is an eye-catching design.

  12. #37
    Confirmed Halfwit
    Join Date
    Oct 1999
    Location
    Vancouver, BC, Canada
    Posts
    983
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'm tired of seeing sites that have three (or even four) columns of news, events, links, and 'stuff'. Even with a 17" monitor it's hard to figure these screens out. I get enough headaches trying to read the newspaper...

    I'm tired of fancy splash screens that don't even give me an option of bypassing them until they're finished. And turn the sound OFF! I do not share your love of techno-funky getyerjiggywithit music. Hearing this crap inside the mall is enough.. don't make me listen to it or watch it online, too!

    I'm tired of websites that don't explain their purpose on the front page. You expect me to read through 500 words and three pages before figuring out what your website it about? No way.

    I'm tired of having sites that have so many graphics they take 20 seconds to load.. over a cable/dsl connection. Good grief. At *least* optimize your graphics! If you have more than one spinning, flashing, rotating anything.. then you have too many. It makes my head hurt.

    I do not stay on these sites. Period. I often will, however, try my best to find the "contact us" page and let them know why I didn't like their site. Sometimes it takes me 20 - 30 seconds just to find the contact us link from the front page! It's like they don't want me to find it. Incredible.

    I agree with the minimalist approach. As with print media, the human brain prefers lots of white space. I truly believe that if designers sat down and actually THOUGHT about their design.. they could create a simple, CLEAN looking webpage that flows naturally with the eye. And still provide enough information to give the user what he/she is looking for.

    Most studies show that a user is willing to click up to three links to find something. Why try to do it all on the first page?

    The sad problem (IMHO) is that most web "designers" are not designers at all. They are programmers.

    Here's a tip. If you are a web "designer"... and you suck at the "design" part.. get a friend who is good at it to help you. Pay someone $50 to review your site. Post it here at SP for review..

    Ooops.. gotta go.

    Cheers!
    - A simple online WYSIWYG editor for HTML code snippets.
    - Managed Web Hosting - $3.95/month (resellers welcome)
    - Why pay more? $8.95 domains & $9.95 SSL certificates!

  13. #38
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Posts
    46
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    hstraf,

    The sad problem (IMHO) is that most web "designers" are not designers at all. They are programmers.
    You've hit the nail on the head. Coding, programming and designing all involve different skill sets. And anyone who does them should be aware of their own limitations.

    Another trend is that people who are learning HTML and design learn on the fly and make their very first version of their very first site public. (I confess, I did it too - 5 years ago.) Thus we are subjected to all kinds of "first-try" sites that should have been revised and tried again (and quite frankly, redesigned) before going live. (This doesn't so much apply to personal sites, but more to corporate/professional ones - those intended for public relations.)

    The best thing about HTML is that it's so easy anyone can do it. The worst thing about HTML is that it's so easy anyone can do it.

    m.

  14. #39
    ComDude CryingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I don't know the cat drug it in!!!
    Posts
    247
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Originally posted by hmahonen

    Though, you should also read Nielsen's column When Bad Design Elements Become the Standard, where he says: "The fact is, no website is seen in isolation: users come to your site expecting things to work the same way they are already used to." which can be basically translated to that do what others do.

    Nielsen's recommendations aren't laws, but they do make actually sense - more information you are about to offer, more likely I would personally recommend to read those and learn. Perhaps you find the right mixture in your design, which "doesn't look ugly and old" and has some degree of usability and accessibility too.
    So we can all be lemmings??? I for one am totally against standards on the interent!!! I think this is one medium that we should break the rules, that we should not conform to any one "standard"

    I remember awhile back, like about 4 or more years ago, I put my site logo on the right side of my page aligned on end vertically... I saw this pop up a few months later on other sites... I smiled cuz I thought "wow, I thought of it first!!!"

    Now I have a tendancy to put my links on the right side of my page "just to be different - ok this one has been done (alot)" The last I looked with my home personal site the links are to the right and the only scroll bar is on the left of that or bottom of the page window

    I do agree that if you are doing a site for customer business or a news site then yeah don't break the standard rules...

    But, I do believe that more people browse for pleasure at more times then for a standard reason...

    If your site is more of an entertainment site then you shouldn't have to follow standards!!!

    Webpage designs should be as free as art where the only rules are in your imagination...

    If you agree with that statment and the links to your site are on the right then by all means redesign your site to make it more intresting for us Lemmings
    body { background:#000000; color:#000000 }
    HEY, WHO TURNED OUT THE LIGHTS?!?
    Easy come easy go!!!
    CryingWolf

  15. #40
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No one has mentioned 45-degree angles yet?

  16. #41
    ComDude CryingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    I don't know the cat drug it in!!!
    Posts
    247
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    That would be a cool idea all your links at a 45 degree angle rigth across your page
    body { background:#000000; color:#000000 }
    HEY, WHO TURNED OUT THE LIGHTS?!?
    Easy come easy go!!!
    CryingWolf

  17. #42
    SitePoint Zealot honging's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Chapel Hill, NC
    Posts
    160
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    45 degree angle sites are definitely getting trendy. I've been building a whole bunch of them myself

  18. #43
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Posts
    41
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    How do you do the 45 degree links? Could someone post an example?

    Thanks
    Brew


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •