SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 57
  1. #26
    SitePoint Addict tuxus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    The single most elegantly designed page on the web can be found at google.com. From the NYT article, apparently Ms Mayer deserves major credit for the design.
    What is so elegant about google.com? It is great from a usability standpoint but it doesn't even validate to a standard. Forgive me if I don't see elegance when I look at Google.

    As for why the graphics dept didn't set up the tests.....apparently Mayer didn't think the results were good enough to choose the more green link color, all those tests did was spark her to override the original color decision with her own and order more tests by the look of it.

  2. #27
    Designer
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Manila
    Posts
    590
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fre420 View Post
    Youtube is a great example of the way Google works. Have you noticed how many different versions they tried of the high quality video button (latest version I saw was HQ icon embedded in the video, first was a normal link under the video).
    The Youtube interface constantly changes, there hasn't passed a month that I haven't seen a new feature, placement, design, etc ... some disappear forever, some change, some stay. Sometimes it takes only a few hours, sometimes days, sometimes weeks.
    I really like their step by step improvements, which hardly anyone notices (but after a year you get a totally different interface).
    I would like to point out that YouTube was not originally designed by Google, but by the creators. Google's usability tests have helped improve YouTube, no doubt, but the original setup/layout/scheme/etc. was done without a committee.

    Which is a point I would like to bring up: when you release something "new", you have the luxury of introducing something different to your users. And you can tweak it as it grows. When you already have a system established, it is very difficult to reintroduce your audience to something different.

    Facebook has this problem. When I had first signed on, they were using the design before this recent change (March 09), and I noticed a lot of users were complaining about that design, whereas I thought that it wasn't bad - just a bit too complex for casual users. However, when they changed it all just recently, I felt disoriented and unsure of where to go. My initial reaction was "I didn't like this."

    Over time, I know this feeling will diminish due to the growth of familiarity. However, with Google, my assumption is that there is an understandable need to have little or no "negative feedback" from users. They are a "power tools" company making tools for the web after all.

  3. #28
    Resident curmudgeon bronze trophy gary.turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    990
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by tuxus View Post
    What is so elegant about google.com? It is great from a usability standpoint but it doesn't even validate to a standard. Forgive me if I don't see elegance when I look at Google.
    First, let's get one thing out of the way. The markup has squat to do with the graphic design of the page, or with the subject at hand.

    What is so elegant is that the page does exactly what it's supposed to do, and the graphic design makes it easy for the user to do it. That's called affordance. Even the logo pulls double duty by adding a touch of friendly whimsy, and by having the bright colors draw the eye directly to the real meat of the page, the query form. To the extent a design helps the user to do what he wants to do, it is a successful design. To the extent a design hinders or fails to help, it is a failure.

    That you cannot see the elegance of the Google home page design indicates that you don't understand the meaning of elegance and likely don't understand the purpose of graphic design in an interactive medium.

    As for why the graphics dept didn't set up the tests.....apparently Mayer didn't think the results were good enough to choose the more green link color, all those tests did was spark her to override the original color decision with her own and order more tests by the look of it.
    What matters is that the design department didn't test. Google has tens of millions of hits every day. Even a small percentage difference in user response means a very large absolute difference. With Google's facilities and infrastructure, it would be a trivial matter to set up any number of tests, and have millions of data points in a very short time.

    Were I to guess, I'd say the guy who wanted the more cyan version, and tested it, knew from studies that people responded more favorably to cyanish blue. Studies I've seen indicate that a magenta object is stand-offish, while cyan is seen as more friendly. The designers should have known that themselves, and adjusted their colors accordingly, and to the purpose.

    cheers,

    gary
    Anyone can build a usable website. It takes a graphic
    designer to make it slow, confusing, and painful to use.

    Simple minded html & css demos and tutorials

  4. #29
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    What is so elegant is that the page does exactly what it's supposed to do, and the graphic design makes it easy for the user to do it. That's called affordance. Even the logo pulls double duty by adding a touch of friendly whimsy, and by having the bright colors draw the eye directly to the real meat of the page, the query form. To the extent a design helps the user to do what he wants to do, it is a successful design. To the extent a design hinders or fails to help, it is a failure.
    This is likely the reason I never, ever use Yahoo or MSN. It's a huge steaming page of text, chat, images, celebrity "news" and garbage, wrapped around a search function. It fills my page.

    If Google wants to spend tons of time testing one shade of blue, their loss, their cost. So long as it doesn't impede the engineers building useful thingies. I forgot, did someone say why teh googles need (graphical) designers again? Apple is selling a product, one the richer members of society are willing to spend an arm and a leg on (basically for the design), while Google is merely trying to control all access to information by making us dependent on it, until the world is enslaved. Muhahahaha...

  5. #30
    SitePoint Wizard Mincer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    London | UK
    Posts
    1,140
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Fre420 View Post
    I think a lot of people here misunderstand the data thing.

    ...

    When someone asks you to design a website, he actually wants to make more money. For an e-shop that means that as many people should buy a product on your website (preferable one with a big margin). Every design decision you make, can influence the decision of the visitor. A huge product picture vs a small one. A red buy button vs a blue one etc, a shiny apple-like interface vs standard web 2.0 style, etc ...

    People that argue against data, may have forgotten why they make the website. A website is something that has to be used, not something you just have to look at.

    It has nothing to do with emotions, as you can test 5 different emotional designs, & test which one performs best to achieve the main goal of the page.

    I actually really like data to base decisions on. Now I don't have to argue for hours with clients because they want an ugly design feature. I design my version & design their version. If their design request performs better, they don't have to pay for the extra time. If mine performs better, they pay the spent time + an extra. Since I work this way, these discussions only take minutes instead of hours/days.
    While I agree with everything you say. I would also note that some of these things are incredibly difficult to quantify a) in a short period of time (these types of testing are usually minutes, hours, possibly weeks) , and b) with relation to the wider audience (i.e. those people you haven't engaged with yet).

    While testing may show a design change to have a negative impact on sales of Widgets over a 2 week period, or lower satisfaction for a user study of your current users, it's extremely hard to offset that against long-term brand building, for instance.

  6. #31
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Design is not about eye candy. That is decoration. Standards are just more tools withing a box that a designer may work. Design is about the usability solely. It is about making things work better for the end user, in any medium.
    If you think that an ad is about making everyone want to buy a product or use a service, you need to get out of advertising and designing commercially, for example. An ad is supposed to help a group of people find a product or service that they really want or need.
    The same can be said about web design or even the interior of an automobile. Successful graphics can be thought of as staying out of the way of site usability... But a great design would visually guide the end user to an ultimate goal in every instance.

  7. #32
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Some companies base their expertize too much on data. Some only on users. I think it should be a combination.

  8. #33
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    1,401
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think I understand his complaints..it drove me nuts but at the end, it was just a job. One time, I made a kick *** design w/ good colors. Then one day, my manager discovered one of the web application that our client owned and they really like the application. So, my boss tells me we want their color scheme. I've argued but at the end, she assigned someone else to change the color. Life goes on~~ kum ba ya~~~

  9. #34
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    606
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you think that an ad is about making everyone want to buy a product or use a service, you need to get out of advertising and designing commercially, for example. An ad is supposed to help a group of people find a product or service that they really want or need.
    I think you need to pull your head out.

  10. #35
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Some people don't trust designers. I've worked with people who have absolutely no sense of style, and feel the need to destroy my designs with no functional/practical reasoning besides the fact that "they" think it would be better (despite a clear majority favouring the original). It's too easy to get emotionally attached to your designs, but come on, that's why we are designers, because we get something out of making kick *** designs/interfaces.

    EDIT: Wow, sitepoint censors the word <snip> now. I don't see any under 8's around here?
    Last edited by AutisticCuckoo; Mar 24, 2009 at 00:59. Reason: Don't try to sneak past the rude language filter

  11. #36
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Google works, why break it? It looks nice. It's easy to use. It's not cluttered with garbage. I use google because of the lack of noise on the screen. I just wonder, why do people think that everything on the web needs to be filled until there is no white space left?

  12. #37
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    175
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by geekmom View Post
    Google works, why break it? It looks nice. It's easy to use. It's not cluttered with garbage. I use google because of the lack of noise on the screen. I just wonder, why do people think that everything on the web needs to be filled until there is no white space left?
    Agree wih you, i like use Google. because the result is my need. not as other search enginer supply some spam results for us

  13. #38
    SitePoint Evangelist Karpie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    445
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Wardrop View Post
    Some people don't trust designers.
    I don't trust designers. I've seen some of the most horrible concepts designed and and approved by other designers, and then its left up to the poor schmuck (me) to figure out how to implement it, and then no-one uses it anyway because its impossible to use.

    And no, I do not get any say on the designs. At all. Not even common sense testing.

  14. #39
    SitePoint Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    852
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Karpie View Post
    I don't trust designers. I've seen some of the most horrible concepts designed and and approved by other designers, and then its left up to the poor schmuck (me) to figure out how to implement it, and then no-one uses it anyway because its impossible to use.
    Then technically speaking, they're not designers, or rather, not interface designers. Making something pretty, and making something usable require two completely different sets of skills. They deal with two different psychologies. It's when they are merged and balanced that you get some truly incredible results. Somebody that can do that, is a true web/(app) designer.

  15. #40
    SitePoint Addict tuxus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    First, let's get one thing out of the way. The markup has squat to do with the graphic design of the page, or with the subject at hand.

    What is so elegant is that the page does exactly what it's supposed to do, and the graphic design makes it easy for the user to do it. That's called affordance. Even the logo pulls double duty by adding a touch of friendly whimsy, and by having the bright colors draw the eye directly to the real meat of the page, the query form. To the extent a design helps the user to do what he wants to do, it is a successful design. To the extent a design hinders or fails to help, it is a failure.

    That you cannot see the elegance of the Google home page design indicates that you don't understand the meaning of elegance and likely don't understand the purpose of graphic design in an interactive medium.

    What matters is that the design department didn't test. Google has tens of millions of hits every day. Even a small percentage difference in user response means a very large absolute difference. With Google's facilities and infrastructure, it would be a trivial matter to set up any number of tests, and have millions of data points in a very short time.

    Were I to guess, I'd say the guy who wanted the more cyan version, and tested it, knew from studies that people responded more favorably to cyanish blue. Studies I've seen indicate that a magenta object is stand-offish, while cyan is seen as more friendly. The designers should have known that themselves, and adjusted their colors accordingly, and to the purpose.

    cheers,

    gary
    Wait, he was a graphic designer? Here I thought he was an interface designer as Google really uses few images, but I guess this is here nor there. affordences are action possibilities which are readily perceivable, not necessarily easy to do, only possible. You said Google.com was the most elegantly designed page, I agree I was tired and missed the word designed hence my mention of standards. With that being said, I can't agree with an absolute statement like that without seeing every page design on the internet, it would be foolhardy.

    I believe it has more to do with interface design than graphic design either way.

    As for your color theory and testing theory, it fails to matter when the decision maker disregards the tests and agreement of the design team and goes with their gut, in such a case doesn't she fail as a leader in that situation if data is prided on as needed for a decision and existing data is ignored? In such a situation I would think it was rather stupid and a contradiction.

    I agree a small percentage of difference would be large with that userbase but the point I was making is that it assumes such is a nonlinear dynamic.

    As for the meaning of elegance, I understand it just fine, however one person often sees an object as elegant where others do not. I don't use Google search because of it's UI, I use it because it has the most relevant search results I have found from a search engine. It's about function and usability over ascetics (which does fit into interface design as far as usability but it has nothing to do with the little things they were picky about for me, only that i can click, type, click and see my results which most SE's are like). Graphic design has little to do with the Google situation though beyond the branding/logo.

    I don't put much faith in a single data set or single study nor does the scientific community, ppl may click something because it has changed and not click it because it no longer sparks that curiosity who knows, ppl are not as simple as math, they don't have rules we can base them on as a whole.

  16. #41
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think search engine like google It would be prefer to rank is more relevant content. With a good quality article with 200+ of words to share it on the planet. Graphic design is imaginative to the one who is viewing. But I think you must mix it with nice words in description. I hope that I help thanks.

  17. #42
    Floridiot joebert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Kenneth City, FL
    Posts
    823
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I separate things into small groups where each group has an equal or similar cost as the others, and write them down.

    I then wrap each piece of paper in plastic wrap and something sticky, shake them all around in a bucket, then fling them all at the wall at the same time.

    Once the number of things still stuck to the wall is within budget I implement those things.

    After awhile I go back and see which ones stuck as far as visitors are concerned, trash what didn't stick, add more ideas to the bucket along with what didn't stick to the wall last time, and try again.

    One day I'm going to clearcoat my wall and sell it for a million bucks, once I figure out how to get around the whole this being an appartment thing.

  18. #43
    Resident curmudgeon bronze trophy gary.turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    990
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by tuxus View Post
    Wait, he was a graphic designer? Here I thought he was an interface designer as Google really uses few images, but I guess this is here nor there. affordences are action possibilities which are readily perceivable, not necessarily easy to do, only possible.
    A graphic designer in an interactive medium, e.g. the web, must be an interface designer (subject to guides provided by the information architect—which seems to be one of Ms Mayer's functions), else he should go back to working in a non-interactive medium, say print.

    Is there any question as to the function of the input widget?

    You said Google.com was the most elegantly designed page, … I can't agree with an absolute statement like that without seeing every page design on the internet, it would be foolhardy.[
    Agreed, there is a degree of error in any comparative statement that does not include the entire population. With that said, if Google's home page isn't number one, my many years on the web gives me a high degree of confidence that it's at least a very close second to whichever page is.

    I believe it has more to do with interface design than graphic design either way.
    In an interactive medium, graphic design and interface design are too intertwined to be separated.

    As for your color theory and testing theory, it fails to matter when the decision maker disregards the tests and agreement of the design team and goes with their gut, in such a case doesn't she fail as a leader in that situation if data is prided on as needed for a decision and existing data is ignored? In such a situation I would think it was rather stupid and a contradiction.
    It's not possible for us to know her reasons, but I can hazard a guess that she was being politic. Just as a mother might settle her children's argument over the last candy bar by cutting it in half, she gave a little, but not all to each child. We can't know whether that was the best decision, but we cannot call it a management failure.

    I agree a small percentage of difference would be large with that userbase but the point I was making is that it assumes such is a nonlinear dynamic.
    Please expand on this. Your statement is opaque to me.

    As for the meaning of elegance, I understand it just fine, however one person often sees an object as elegant where others do not.
    My sense is that you don't understand the term in this milieu. In general, elegance is characterized by grace, propriety, and refinement, and the absence of every thing offensive. Specifically, in terms more closely related to the medium, combining simplicity, power, and a certain ineffable grace of design. Or, as Saint-Exupery put it, "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

    I don't use Google search because of it's UI, I use it because it has the most relevant search results I have found from a search engine. It's about function and usability over ascetics[sic] (which does fit into interface design as far as usability but it has nothing to do with the little things they were picky about for me, only that i can click, type, click and see my results which most SE's are like). Graphic design has little to do with the Google situation though beyond the branding/logo.
    That the eye is drawn directly to the form control is excellent graphic design and implies excellent information architecture. Opening Photoshop is is only a part of graphic design, and is likely the single least important part. Decisions regarding typography and colors are certainly more important, being requisite. Images are not requisite. Æsthetics are certainly an important factor, and will set the tone or mood of the page. I sure would hide the Heironymus Bosch art if I were trying to romance a young lady.

    Stomme poes made mention of Yahoo!, which overwhelms you by trying to be too much; too much noise. MSFT's Live Search design, except for the background image. is almost identical to Google's. The designer got in the way, by making the image a little too strong. It draws the eye away from the form control. Hey, nice picture, but that's not why I'd go there, therefore the design is sub-optimal; not elegant.

    I don't put much faith in a single data set or single study nor does the scientific community, ppl may click something because it has changed and not click it because it no longer sparks that curiosity who knows, ppl are not as simple as math, they don't have rules we can base them on as a whole.
    In a large population, a well chosen sample of 3500 will give results with a high degree of confidence that it represents the whole. It's been wa-ay too long since I studied statistics, but the function is roughly 1±(sample÷(sample+1)). It would be difficult for Google to make any comparative study with a smaller sample.

    It is true you can't predict any one individual's response, but you can, and we do it all the time, predict a large population's.

    cheers,

    gary
    Anyone can build a usable website. It takes a graphic
    designer to make it slow, confusing, and painful to use.

    Simple minded html & css demos and tutorials

  19. #44
    SitePoint Addict tuxus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My statement regarding nonlinear dynamics was worded incorrectly so it is no wonder you didn't understand it. I was attempting to point out that by comparing 40 some odd shades of a similar color assumes that the outcome between so many shades will be a large one and not just chaotic. I don't believe their would be a sensitive dependence on the color if the difference were to be between colors which are close in the blue spectrum although their may be between colors at the opposite ends of the spectrum in relation to those in the middle etc. 40 some odd shades is a bit much that is all.

    graphic design and interface design, differences can be argued but it comes down to personal opinion I think, just like the thread about defining developer vs designer, each team has a different approach. In this case it maybe better just to call this person a web designer, I do see where your coming from and even agree that graphics are the least important part of design but I'm on the fence about what label fits best. It seems to me you can be a graphic designer without being an interface designer and vice versa but you can't be a good web designer without being both.

    As for her management decision, it depends on the desired outcome if her decision was correct, given how easy you mentioned it is for them to run tests it may have been better to wait for more test results, then again the fact she felt it was a minor enough issue to go with her gut instead of data may show that it wasn't all that important.

    Interestingly enough under the Saint-Exupery definition I can think of plenty of items which should be moved from the front page to somewhere deeper.

    With stats we can predict the response of others on a short term basis assuming we get the variables correct but an unknown or forgotten variable makes the result set inaccurate. As for smaller samples, it depends on the controls in that study really, however I can't see using a small sample when you have access to generate a massive amount of data for the study.

    None the less, your previous post has added some clarity to your points and given me a few things to ponder. Speaking of a company we all see only from the outside is hard to do with any accuracy.

  20. #45
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gary
    I sure would hide the Heironymus Bosch art if I were trying to romance a young lady.
    That one gets a Lawlz!

    Quote Originally Posted by tuxus
    I don't believe their would be a sensitive dependence on the color if the difference were to be between colors which are close in the blue spectrum although their may be between colors at the opposite ends of the spectrum in relation to those in the middle etc. 40 some odd shades is a bit much that is all.
    Seems extreme to me as well, esp considering that even if you get the perfect colour, there will be hue and contrast differences per screen and OS anyway.
    I can imagine a company spending this inordinate amount of time researching the colour of a logo or a product's exteriour. In fact, I invest in a small company who makes colour-matching products, for screens, paper/materials, and even teeth (they bought Pantone too).

  21. #46
    Resident curmudgeon bronze trophy gary.turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    990
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    That one gets a Lawlz!
    It's hard to sell the delights of sinning when the tortures of hell are bearing down.

    Seems extreme to me as well, esp considering that even if you get the perfect colour, there will be hue and contrast differences per screen and OS anyway.
    I can imagine a company spending this inordinate amount of time researching the colour of a logo or a product's exteriour. In fact, I invest in a small company who makes colour-matching products, for screens, paper/materials, and even teeth (they bought Pantone too).
    Until I made a test table, I kinda figured there would too much ambiguity. Run the php page below. Notice especially the middle values. It is trivial to find a block 40 color values that are still significantly different. Play with the arrays.
    Code:
    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
        "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
    
    <html xml:lang="en"
          xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
          lang="en">
    <head>
      <meta name="generator"
            content=
            "HTML Tidy for Linux (vers 7 December 2008), see www.w3.org" />
    
      <title></title>
      <meta http-equiv="content-type"
            content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
      <meta name="author"
            content="Gary Turner" />
      <style type="text/css">
    /*<![CDATA[*/
    
      body {
        background-color: white;
        color: black;
        font: 100% serif;
        }
    
      p {
        font-size: 1em;
        }
    
      table {
        border-collapse: collapse;
        }
    
      caption {
        white-space: nowrap;
        }
    
      th {
        border: 1px solid blue;
        height: 50px;
        width: 50px;
        }
    
      /*]]>*/
      </style>
    </head>
    
    <body>
      <?php
        $blue = array("00", "11", "22", "33", "44", "55", "66", "77", "88", "99", "aa", "bb", "cc", "dd", "ee", "ff");
        $green = array("00", "11", "22", "33", "44", "55", "66", "77", "88", "99", "aa", "bb", "cc", "dd", "ee", "ff");
        $red = "00";
        ?>
    
      <table summary="color chart">
        <caption>
          Blues with various levels of green adulteration
        </caption>
    
        <thead>
          <tr>
            <th>Blue&nbsp;→
            <br />
            Green&nbsp;↓</th><?php
                    foreach ($blue as $bvalue) {
                       echo "<th>$bvalue</th> \n";
                       }
                    ?>
          </tr>
        </thead>
    
        <tbody>
          <?php
                foreach ($green as $gvalue) {
                   echo "<tr>\n
                     <th>$gvalue</th>\n";
                  foreach ($blue as $bvalue) {
                     echo "<td style=\"background-color: #$red$gvalue$bvalue;\">&nbsp;</td>\n";
                  }
                  echo "</tr>\n"; 
                }?>
        </tbody>
      </table>
    </body>
    </html>
    cheers,

    gary
    Anyone can build a usable website. It takes a graphic
    designer to make it slow, confusing, and painful to use.

    Simple minded html & css demos and tutorials

  22. #47
    Brevity is greatly overrated brandaggio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,424
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    What wonderful bends and turns this discussion has taken...

    One thing I wanted to get into the dialogue are the ideas of creative and reactive design (and vs. to some degree).

    There is a lot of criticism that is being thrown around against those that like it pretty and those that like it to be usable (which as others have pointed out, don't have to be in opposition).

    As an employee, It could be stifling to not be able to create much, but instead react and maintain - probably not what you trained to do at RISD. Some would prefer to react and maintain though - understood.

    Additionally, no one approach is the "right way" - a hybrid approach that allows for potentially "vertical" leaping innovations (fact is some designers/artists really have forward leaning ideas that are that good - as do some engineers), while making sure that functionality that has been obviously important to the user is maintained and continued to be improved upon, would seem the proper course.

    In quality design you need salt-n-pepa.

  23. #48
    SitePoint Addict tuxus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Gary your code didn't work for me (and I'm a lil short on time at the moment. 1 problem exists however, we don't know the 2 shades they were testing 41 between. As I said I figured their would exist a difference between the end when compared to the middle but didn't expect much difference from those in between. I will take a look at the code and see why it's not working on my end when I have a moment.

  24. #49
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    7
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That guy should go and design a really flashy animated cool looking site that no-one visits ;-)

    Bless 'im hehe.

  25. #50
    Resident curmudgeon bronze trophy gary.turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    990
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by tuxus View Post
    Gary your code didn't work for me (and I'm a lil short on time at the moment. 1 problem exists however, we don't know the 2 shades they were testing 41 between. As I said I figured their would exist a difference between the end when compared to the middle but didn't expect much difference from those in between. I will take a look at the code and see why it's not working on my end when I have a moment.
    True, we don't know their level of granularity nor do we know the bounds. The script merely illustrates the potential for significant differences visually.

    Don't know why the script fails for you. The copy to the thread is OK.
    Code:
    gt@aretha:/mnt/koko/public_html$ diff -c /mnt/koko/public_html/debugfile /mnt/koko/public_html/colortest.php
    *** /mnt/koko/public_html/debugfile     2009-03-26 15:52:03.000000000 -0500
    --- /mnt/koko/public_html/colortest.php 2009-03-26 05:09:29.000000000 -0500
    ***************
    *** 82,85 ****
          </tbody>
        </table>
      </body>
    ! </html>
    \ No newline at end of file
    --- 82,85 ----
          </tbody>
        </table>
      </body>
    ! </html>
    As you can see, the only difference between my working copy and the posted version is that I didn't include the newline after </html> when copy/pasting.

    Platform is Debian Squeeze Gnu/Linux on an old P3 Dell. Apache and PHP5 are
    Code:
    gt@aretha:/mnt/koko/public_html$ apt-cache policy apache2
    apache2:
      Installed: 2.2.11-2
      Candidate: 2.2.11-2
      Version table:
     *** 2.2.11-2 0
            500 http://ftp.us.debian.org squeeze/main Packages
            100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
    gt@aretha:/mnt/koko/public_html$ apt-cache policy php5
    php5:
      Installed: 5.2.6.dfsg.1-3
      Candidate: 5.2.6.dfsg.1-3
      Version table:
     *** 5.2.6.dfsg.1-3 0
            500 http://ftp.us.debian.org squeeze/main Packages
            100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
    "aretha" is my workstation, and "koko" is my lan server machine.

    What error message do you get? Or, is it failing quietly? And, the stupid question that must be asked, is the script saved as a .php file and is the server handing it off to the interpreter?

    cheers,

    gary
    Anyone can build a usable website. It takes a graphic
    designer to make it slow, confusing, and painful to use.

    Simple minded html & css demos and tutorials


Tags for this Thread

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
  •