What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How to Make Your PC as Fast as the Day You Bought It view!
howlifeworks.com - What's the fastest way to restore a computer to its original blazing glory
79 Comments
- SpoonMSU, on 04/14/2009, -3/+60I thought of a few myself.
8. When designing a new site, use the 'wet floor' technique look early and often.
9. When in doubt, put a drop shadow on it.
10. The slideshow format: Less reading per page, more ad revenue, everybody wins!
11. The Impact font is one of the most underrated fonts out there. And, it's installed on your Windows PC by default! Also, Comic Sans.
12. If you really want to draw attention to some text, take it into Photoshop, tilt it slightly to the left, then put a star badge around it. Don't forget rules 8 and 9.
13. Don't worry about those minority browsers like Firefox and Safari. If it looks good in IE5.5, you're golden. - Dan050, on 04/14/2009, -6/+62Having a 1 pixel border on every box, graphic and background doesn't mean your website is 'pixel perfect', give me a break!
- nikki2300dk, on 04/14/2009, -2/+39Actually the article isn't so bad as people are making it sound. There are some good tips.
Doesn't sound to me like he's saying to put 1 pixel lines around everything...
FTA:
"What I mean when I talk about Pixel Perfect Detail is the method of paying close attention to lines, edges and borders. Rather than just have a simple line, SOMETIMES adding some small details, whether it be subtle gradients, or something as a simple 1px shadow or highlight can really make your work stand out." - NathanielJ, on 04/14/2009, -3/+23That's strange, I don't see the section titled "layout your site using obnoxiously narrow columns, two of which contains ads and mostly useless buttons, so that on any realistic resolution your site has about 25% of its width being content and the rest being wasted."
Comprende, wefunction.com? - fuse13, on 04/14/2009, -1/+171. it looks good.
i work in web, and all the of the things mentioned in the article are good, but they dont make a good design. you can ignore all the things mentioned and make an amazing design or do all of them and make a crap design. its the whole that counts, and having recently gone through a lot of creative portfolios i can tell you that great design leaps out at your from a quick visual scan. sure, a lot of details go into it, but the balance of the whole item is what counts. clean, sharp and funky - but nothing should overrule the function. truly great design in any field requires form to follow function and web is no exception. creating a truly unique and compelling design within the required function is the real success. - dazparkour, on 04/14/2009, -18/+28What?
Add a lot of 1 pixel edges, white space, ***** with the font until it's non-standard, hit the option for shadows in photoshop and you are willing to endorse Digg as quality?
Digg does not border everything with a 1 pixel edge "Just Cause", only the things that need it.
Digg has very little white space. I prefer this - digg is information rich and I don't want to scroll more than I read.
Digg uses normal fonts.
No shaddows on Digg.
Yes, you may be able to spot where, if used CORRECTLY, a designer has went the extra mile but this list suggests too much that anything that doesn't have a 1 pixel line around everything is done wrong. - cJw314, on 04/14/2009, -3/+11"How to Spot What We Wrongly Consider Quality within Last Decade's Standard Web Design: Examples & Tips"
*Fixed - Eorster, on 04/14/2009, -4/+11Quality is all about web 2.0, of course! Oh, and not using tables, always using css, of course. Ohh, and putting some sort of flash component in there, of course. Ohh, and having a designer/"HTML programmer" that wears white rimmed eye glasses if the red rimmed glasses are not available. Now that is the sign of a true quality web designer that you will get a true quality web design from.
- chadsmith729, on 04/14/2009, -1/+6I still think any website who still uses the dog. http://www.shout.net/~rhiggins/dogmver.gif
Has spot on picture perfect web design. Long live 1980's web design! - inactive, on 04/14/2009, -0/+5No, because I perma-disabled that annoying piece of poo immediately.
I'd be much happier if Digg would FIX THE JUMPING EDIT BOX BUG which has been around for over a year now, instead of playing with new toys they think we all need. I need a working editor, and couldn't give two ***** about the Digg bar. - Eorster, on 04/14/2009, -2/+7Is there such a thing as an "HTML programmer?" I'm getting confused these days. Must be all the quality web 2.0 designs making me think designers know what a control structure is.
- WhoDoneIt, on 04/14/2009, -1/+6Interesting, I actually thought there might be examples of good design.
What they are presenting, in their opinion, is examples of good layout and typography. Not good design, IMO.
Good design in websites are what break you apart from your competition. None of these examples I would remember and associate with the company. I find the more "Web 2.0" the design, the same they all look and are not unique, for the most part.
Break out of the current trend and design unique interfaces, albeit functional interfaces, but don't position their designs to look and feel like it's a Wordpress install.
Designing for the web shouldn't be any more different than designing for print. In fact most companies also utilize print materials and how are you supposed to keep a consistent look and feel amongst marketing material if you DO design within the current trends. - Jonwils, on 04/14/2009, -1/+6It doesn't even take you to the home page when you click it either. On my laptop nearly half the screen is taken up before I even see the content.
- donnytomas, on 04/14/2009, -1/+6My threshold is the peeing man:
http://www.feebleminds-gifs.com/peeing-man.gif - Jonwils, on 04/14/2009, -3/+7is anyone getting weird lines from the digg bar?
http://img259.imageshack.us/my.php?image=picture3x ... - inactive, on 04/14/2009, -0/+4jQuery is the new Flash.
- inactive, on 04/14/2009, -0/+4NEEDS MORE IMPACT
I remember the very first time I saw that font, I had the feeling I'd be seeing too much of it... - liamuk7, on 04/15/2009, -0/+4The point is that paying attention to small details can impact the quality of a design. Not that 1 pixel borders equate to quality design. They are just one example of the point.
- arbulus, on 04/14/2009, -1/+5@dave122
Tables are for tabular data, not site layout.
@Eorster
There's something called web standards. It's not about what's "cool" or "the thing," it's about coding a site so that it is accessible by anyone who wants to see it from any browser and having everyone see the same thing. Choosing to ignore W3C standards is just moronic if you're a designer/developer. - zeeneo, on 04/14/2009, -1/+5Work with "old-school" designers who are willing to show you how they do it.
With padding/sizing I always think of a number then add another 20% - normally works for me.
The article only mentions contrast once?
I'd enjoy the article more if it wasn't pointing everything out but instead guided you how to think for yourself. - gfox, on 04/15/2009, -0/+4Do a usability test. That's what really counts.
- azureskies88, on 04/14/2009, -1/+5If you have to use a rubric to determine if a Web site is designed well, you're doing it wrong.
- monosyth, on 04/14/2009, -0/+4the diggbar has used a lot of these design elements - including drop shadow, one pixel outlines and gradual gradient. just sayin'
- arbulus, on 04/14/2009, -2/+6If you are still using tables instead of css, you shouldn't be designing websites. That's not a negotiable point at all.
- GamingBob, on 04/14/2009, -3/+7They might want to rethink their site's design, why is the logo banner enormously tall?
- dave122, on 04/14/2009, -3/+7Any proficient web designer/programmer will use both. They both have their purposes, bending css to do something it wasn't meant to do for the sole purpose of not using a table is not good programming, it's blind stubbornness.
- nickels, on 04/14/2009, -0/+4Do as I say, not as I do ;)
- inactive, on 04/15/2009, -0/+3I was ok with your list until I came to comic sans
- theneweddie, on 04/14/2009, -5/+8I stopped reading after the first 2 grammatical errors in just the first section.
Guess if it looks good, grammar doesn't count. ( but notice my use of space .) - chopeh, on 04/14/2009, -1/+4Some good tips, mostly things I do without thinking about them. Just remember that these don't apply to EVERY case, adding 1px borders to everything under the sun will not make your design better. But try it, and it could help in specific cases.
But none the less; these should help those designers out there with designs that are slightly lacking in the finishing department, - judicar, on 04/15/2009, -0/+3Apparently devoting the top 30% of your website to a mostly blank, black, useless bar is also a key element in good design.
- ConfusedCartman, on 04/15/2009, -0/+3I agree. Web 2.0 designs look great, but if you're going to be using the site for more than 15 minutes you want something simple and standard, not complex, colorful, and "3D".
- krues8dr, on 04/14/2009, -0/+3++this. Also, note that #7 on their list goes against everything else on the list. "Be DIFFERENT by being THE SAME" (Isn't that also the "I'm a PC" campaign?)
- neillawson, on 04/15/2009, -0/+3Insert finger into arse
- inactive, on 04/14/2009, -0/+3Digg does use rounded corners though.
- mattharvey716, on 04/14/2009, -1/+4i am, sucks balls.
using Safari - cre8tivate, on 04/14/2009, -0/+3A good web designer recognizes the design trends and designs for today's trends, but with classic roots so it doesn't look out of date tomorrow. Most of these web kidz who think they are web designers are just (pirated) photoshop junkies who design Word Press templates.
- zeebo, on 04/15/2009, -0/+3There are a lot of javascript libraries that allow you to do flashy things without the need of an extra plugin. As the speed of js interpreters increase I think you'll see more and more sites dropping flash in situations where simple js will suffice.
I tend to favor prototype+scriptaculous myself. - albaghly, on 04/14/2009, -1/+4yes... wtf...
- fastcars, on 04/14/2009, -0/+3Whilst I can see why people critique the aesthetics of the function site i think there's some basic tips here in the content on what to look for - not all appropriate for all sites but still worth the read.
I think the bigger thing for me was realising how registered digg users are clearly design gurus and happy to contribute comments. - inactive, on 04/15/2009, -0/+2yup... attention to detail, nicely spaced content and decent photoshop work go a long way to making nice websites. whodathunkit?
cant wait for the next super helpful website tips article. - liamuk7, on 04/15/2009, -0/+2@NathanielJ - I must be honest, when I originally designed the site I didn't really expect to be writing posts of that length, which I guess is why the proportion seems a little out. For sure that will change when we next update.
- MLisa, on 04/14/2009, -1/+3I also had to stop reading the article due to the grammar and awkward phrasing.
FTA: "As you can see here, there is a very clean and open feel to the content here."
"Taking a close look at the Postbox website, you can really see how space there is around the edges." - inactive, on 04/14/2009, -0/+2digg bar sucks, they should have focused on fixing core problems on digg like dupe issues rather than rolling out a useless piece of functionality
- shwerm601, on 04/15/2009, -0/+2which is precisely why im a coder and suck at photoshop :) well said both of you
- bdbr, on 04/15/2009, -0/+2Apparently, it also means lots and lots of empty space. We didn't spend all this money on screens just to see more freakin' WORDS!
- ConfusedCartman, on 04/15/2009, -0/+2I agree. It seems like they make Web Design into a science, one that can be explained and taught. Web Design is much more like art - while there are good standards that you _should_ follow, the best designs come from going out on a limb and taking risks.
- WhoDoneIt, on 04/15/2009, -0/+2I don't think I made myself clear then. I wasn't implying that print and web are similar to design, I realize this as I do both and have for many, many years. I was saying you need to brand yourself as a whole and have both pieces talk back and forth together. Having a web 2.0 looking site isn't going to help your print marketing and branding because you'd NEVER design a print piece resembling a web 2.0 looking site.
You need to identity yourself WITH your print AND your website. And the best way to do that is to have similar looking marketing pieces in design. - inactive, on 04/14/2009, -0/+2Speaking of pixel perfect, why does the border of the side column need to follow me down the page? I know someone had to notice the giant void between the two thin lines that render two thirds of the page useless. Let me guess... It was an attempt at applying negative s p a c e to their page...
-
Show 51 - 84 of 84 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
