What is Digg?68 Comments
- 0o0o0o, on 12/19/2008, -3/+25I'm not a fan of separating "artistic design" as a distinction in web design. Web design is a medium in itself, but lists like this just make it seem like the website design is one thing and the art is another. So with that said, I think most of these are actually over-designed. They are heavily decorated, and many of them at the sacrifice of their usability and information flow.
When I think of beautifully art directed websites, I think of the New York Times site, or Digg, or any project that has to push around a lot of information and content while still maintaining style. Anyone can follow the current flood of photoshop trends to drop ornaments and textures all over the frame of a website and have it come out looking good. These are all really nice looking websites, but outstanding artistic design, I disagree. - Azimuth1, on 12/19/2008, -1/+23Remember when the Internet was Times New Roman, animated GIFs saying "WELCOME", and frames?
Good times. - JO3M4N, on 12/19/2008, -4/+22Some of those just look like a blogger premade layout.
Meh. - johnwiz, on 12/19/2008, -1/+12dugg for being on 1 page
- FredFredrickson, on 12/19/2008, -0/+9There are some neat sites there, but looking over each one in succession just makes me realize how overplayed some of the current design trends are. At least half of those sites are just grunge effect gone wild, and many of the rest are just the same old "explosion of things" at the top, and then nothing below.
Don't get me wrong, there's a lot of good art in there, but a lot of it is just a bit too trendy for this artist. - xB4R7x, on 12/19/2008, -0/+7Am I the only one that thinks ***** like that makes it worse?
- moraldebate, on 12/19/2008, -1/+8Isn't it amazing how usable most of those designs are? 4 years ago, that list would've been populated with Flash-crazy sites that were practically unnavigable.
- fattehboi, on 12/19/2008, -0/+7meh....nothing that new or interesting.
- pathouston22, on 12/19/2008, -0/+6UNDER CONSTRUCTION
- Totz83, on 12/19/2008, -0/+5The sites look good but theres no real "out of the box design" in any of them, as far as I can see it's all just content blended into background images.
- feliks2, on 12/19/2008, -0/+5These are better than most, but for the most part they aren't AMAZING or anything.
- xB4R7x, on 12/19/2008, -0/+4Oh look! Another /s comment about a /s comment on digg!!
/s - rynsa, on 12/19/2008, -0/+4Dugg for cogent articulation.
However, I have to respectfully disagree. You argument suggests that design is primarily a matter of function, a very practical approach to determining great 'artistic design.'
But the form of media is equally significant if only for its immediate impact on the audience/participant. I mean, look at the recent population shift from MySpace to Facebook. The two networks more or less share the same technical capabilities (with minor difference), but Facebook provides a cleaner, more elegant interface.
Basically, in philosophical terms (Plato), beauty is just as valuable as truth. - gametavern, on 12/19/2008, -1/+5Wow, I'm actually impressed by these. Usually they're nothing special, but most of these are great.
- erichw1504, on 12/19/2008, -1/+5I really liked Rin-Wendy, very neat.
- ostracize, on 12/19/2008, -0/+4Keep him at 1
- Chairboy, on 12/19/2008, -0/+4Some impressive website designs, but a part of me cringes a little when a website with a grandiose name like 'Web Designer Depot' has a site that renders like this:
http://hallert.net/images/webdesignerdepot.jpg
I'm using Chrome because of a recent mysterious series of crashes in Firefox 3.0.X so it might be unique to the beta browser I'm using, but I'd hope that a standards compliant page would be less likely to render like this than... something else. Did anyone else get something like this? - csarak, on 12/19/2008, -0/+3Absolutely not. They may be pretty but they're frustrating to navigate. When something is meant to be functional, functioning takes first priority, or it only takes away from aesthetics.
- badradio, on 12/21/2008, -0/+2New design on http://thedirty.com, pretty hardcore for wordpress
- AlxRymnd914, on 12/19/2008, -0/+3one epic page.
- inactive, on 12/19/2008, -0/+3You just have to modify the sub-atomic resonance of the anti-matter injectors to reinitalise a chronoton particle leak in the plasma conduits.
- allankh, on 12/19/2008, -0/+3You're joking, right? Both of these links are good examples of how not to build a website. The "life visuals" one even has a "best in IE" label on it. Ouch.
- inactive, on 12/19/2008, -1/+3Looks more like 100 WordPress blog designs.
- IamNOTmrT, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Creative and visually stunning for most of them. But how do you maintain a site like those and draw people to the content within. I like practical, simple, tidy layouts. Digg being a good example.
- Baryn, on 12/20/2008, -0/+2NO NO
- bigjohn426, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Oh look, another hopeful digger trying to get a ridiculously long thread going about a stupid meme.
- idavidcrockett, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Cute list, but most the websites were blogs or portfolios that people just look at. I would like to see a list of well designed web applications that people interact with, such as Facebook or Gmail.
footnote: I am super jealous of Matt Mullenweg's domain name: ma.tt - Groovydoo, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Wow! All 100 design affirm that art and presentation only work when HTML and CSS are solid!
- Gruul, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2The site with the list will never make this top 100 for sure !
- ElecBoy, on 12/20/2008, -0/+2And I block you too!
- PrairieDoggin, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2That's what she said.
- bmson, on 12/19/2008, -1/+3I blocked you
- jameson5, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2If you ask me, it's high time websites start looking like garbage in IE6. Web designers should be looking toward the future and better ways of doing things, not wasting hours making it look good on an obsolete browser.
- glackinator, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Dugg for all being on the same page.
- xB4R7x, on 12/22/2008, -0/+2Hey man... had to. :P
- beauley, on 12/21/2008, -0/+2Speaking of images...
Picture taken in available light on bright sunny day.
http://www.picable.com/Nature/Birds/The-Majestic-W ...
The Majestic White Peacock - inactive, on 12/20/2008, -0/+2This list should be labeled "100 websites that make you wonder where you are supposed to click"
- Totz83, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2lmao
- shaba1, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2looks like it was taken from:
http://www.webdesignerwall.com/trends/2008-design- ... - MonkeyNews, on 12/24/2008, -0/+2Somewhat agree - The primary focus of good web design should never be "artistic" - if a site is considered by users as artistic then it should be a by-product if anything. The focus should be on function. Is it usable?
Too many websites sacrifice this as they see their design as a work of art. - Tochi, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2Renders fine in IE8... which isn't much to brag about...
I'm at work which is the only reason I'm using IE - nategoyer, on 12/23/2008, -0/+2most of these are annoying
- wickedwombat, on 12/20/2008, -0/+2The most overused styles that you can find would have been a more accuarate description...
Some are quite good but most of them are just as uncreative as a phonebook. - Liz107psualumni, on 12/19/2008, -0/+2I like these a lot. Thank you to whoever collected all of these.
- stratazzz, on 12/20/2008, -0/+2www.jaccfashion.com
- Baryn, on 12/20/2008, -0/+2YES YES
- Baryn, on 12/20/2008, -0/+2The graphic is just a graphic; it is not a website. Graphic design and web design should go hand-in-hand, otherwise design for a magazine.
- mohimona, on 12/21/2008, -0/+1This is a really useful list. www.jwelaryland.blogspot.com
- pevachon, on 12/19/2008, -1/+2I must admit I was expecting a buch of designer gone crazy on a flash overdose type sites but all and all pretty impressed. Finally the industry seems to be shifting in more usable layouts. Good find thanks
- ezran, on 12/19/2008, -1/+2Oh look! Another /s comment on digg!!
/s -
Show 51 - 72 of 72 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 