My vote for quote of the day goes to Mark Zabrammy…
Granted, while design trends like gradients, large fonts, and high contrast graphics may fade, the idea of simplifying information and accessibility is here to stay.
Source: Three Minds
• Om Malik says that Live is a better brand than MSN. I agree with him. Live is going to be powerful and gooble up the mainstream audience like you wouldn’t believe.
• Logic+Emotion asks if the Agency video was for Agency.com or Subway. It was obviously for Agency.com but that isn’t a bad thing. While the video is cheesy people are still talking and thinking about them.
• Fred Wilson’s VC cliche of the week is don’t count your chickens before they hatch. One of the first leasons I learned in life but man it’s a hard one to follow sometimes.
• USAToday has a feature on Danny Sullivan, the unofficial ambassador of search marketing. Congrats to Danny and all his success.
• Bottlz 2.0. See what happens when a drink company hires a web designer.
• Adrants points us to SuperPitch, a game where you become an ad agency trying to win new business.
Update: Coudal Partners launches their response to the Agency.com video.
I decided to make a list of the top libraries that I have come across or that I personally use. Libraries can be a web developers best friend. They are great resources to learn from and can save hours and hours of time. These libraries include JavaScript, Ajax, Colors, PHP, and CSS. These should be in any web developers bookmarks, so go ahead and look through these libraries and bookmark your favorite ones. The list is in no particular order.
Bad design is better, blah blah blah. Markus from Plentyoffish.com is at again, trying to convince us all that bad design is better, or not . He’s added a little twist this time, saying that sometimes it’s better and sometimes it’s not. Bad design is never better my friend.
I can understand the point Markus is trying to make…
Users don’t want to be distracted by useless graphics, colors, features etc.
But wait, no one is saying that useless graphics and features are better, and that’s not what makes for good design. But that doesn’t mean bad design is better. The only reason Plentyoffish makes money is because 1) it’s free, and 2) the rankings. Try charging your customers and see what happens. Your success has nothing to do with the fact that it’s a god-awful design.
Good UI and proper design will win every single time, hands down. Before you start asking if designers are clued in, get a clue yourself!
I critiqued a whole bunch of web 2.0 sites on a combination of design and usability aspects, placing more importance on the usability aspect. I tried to focus more on sites that provide a good community oriented experience, designs that encourage people to participate. After all, that’s the staple of what “web 2.0″ is.
The final result is 10 sites that I feel are the best combination of both good design and usability. The list is in no particular order.
I’m probably better off calling this a ‘dedesign’ since that’s pretty much what I did, stripped it down to nothing. But I like it this way, it’s simple, clean, and very usable. My goal for the redesign was all about focusing on making the content more accessible. Since this is a blog the content is the most important thing. I really wanted to bring it out.
So I’ve been a little slow with the posting lately, I’m sorry! I was busy trying to get this blog redesigned. I never was pleased with the old look and always had plans to change it, finding the time has been another story.
There’s been some noise lately suggesting that bad design is good or it’s the anti-marketing design (ugly site) that’s what makes a website successful.
I disagree, but for arguments sake let’s take a look at some of the more successful websites.
Let’s take Craigslist, Google, eBay, and Amazon to name a few. What do all these sites have in common? They’re not beautiful that’s for sure. I wouldn’t say that Craigslist and Google are ugly, but their sure not pretty either. Amazon and eBay on the other hand are pretty damn ugly.
So what makes these sites so successful? Is it because they’re ugly? I think not. Google and Craigslist and are successful because the user interface is straight forward and simple. That and their customers are great evangelists. So what then makes Amazon and eBay so popular? Both of these sites have horrible user interfaces so we know it’s not that. I’d say it’s because they were both first to market in their niches and have since dominated.
Yes, having a website that is simple to use and fast is one key to being successful, but I wouldn’t design your website to look like ass on purpose. For every popular website that’s ugly there’s 5 great looking popular sites.
What’s your take on this?
Cameron Olthuis is the Founder of Factive Media, an action sports media network. Follow his storyline and adventures of building an Internet empire here. Find out more about Cameron...