When establishing a Web design and development business, what do you think is the preferable design style? I've put together a few pros/cons but I'm still in an indecisive mood. Anyone whom like to add there 2 cents would be much appreciated.
Corporate Pros: More professional, Higher level of trust within the company, Better features and support, Larger and more knowledgeable staff base Cons: Lacks individuality, less-credible from a creativity point of view, Feel of robot staff
Web 2.0 / Flash Pros: Up to date with latest design trends, Inviting, Simple and User-friendly, More of a one-on-one experience Cons: Lacks professionalism, perceived as providing less secure solutions, Less credible as an established and authentic company
I know what you mean. If you go for a corporate design, the visitor tends to feel like they're in a middle of a city lost while everyone around them is just hurridly walking if you know what I mean. However Web 2.0/Flash simply lack professionalism, which is something you definatly don't want.
I think you should go for a bit of both, you can make the visitor feel more of a one-on-one experiance but still keep the proffesionalism within your design. It's just a lot harder to do and requires a lot more effort. Carefully think about your header, make it proffesional and don't worry about what your visitor prefers for this. The visitor wants the content - not the design. Then try to make the content more simple, a bit more Web 2.0/Flash as you put it. Simple content headers, Order Buttons etc. etc.
why not set up two sites targeted at different types of customers...
then you can link between them... e.g. "corporate customers click here" and "small biz customers click here"
Fast Fwd Multimedia Web, IT & Cloud Computing Consultancy Currently looking for web freelancers. Get in touch!
This is a delimma. I went through the same type of thing.
Like Kish said, you could have 2 sites to target both types of customers.
You could also mix the 2. Go for the look of Web 2.0/Flash, but make your text (and maybe even graphic) content very professional and targeted, not artsy/cutesy and funny. For example, PhotoJojo's website is fun and cutesy. They use fun wording/text - nothing stuffy on here. But if they were a web design firm, I don't know if I would go with them if I were a professional with a accounting office or an attorney with a firm.
I guess it all depends on who your target audience is...if you have one. Me, I don't have a "target" audience, so I had to incorporate a little "artsy" and a little "professional".
as they have said - depends on who your target audience is. An ad agency will go for a flashbang site with bells and whistles. If you're going for straight up info delivery like a ****.com or craigslist then a sparse design can be pretty effective.
This is a false dichotomy. And the Web 2.0 thing is anything but creative.
The real problem is having a corporate veneer or web 2.0 veneer which has nothing to do with anything. Generic text. Me-too policies. Ho-hum services.
Geeksquad was set up practically like a cartoon -their customer list reads like a who's who of prestigious corporate America. Joel Spolsky's Fog Creek and 37Signals are a philosophy first -- love it or hate it. Specific policies and techniques which are coherent with the philosophy second. ... and a micron deep photoshopped veneer a far distant third.
Bookmarks