What is Digg?119 Comments
- spadin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3nice try, but you are using images for simple roll overs, a no-no.
- kevinrose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Looks great - I wish google would consider a design like this
- socket, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Ugly and completely unnecessary. The made up slogan is awful and sounds like something stupid Microsoft would think up. Google simple design is that way for a reason...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well..it looks nice, good design. But none of the links/buttons work...
- dombi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I am also confused with the "working" part of the title.
- Ratty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1disable images and i can't use the site... lame!
current google is better. - techlinks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I like it.
- mephitix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yeah, it looks good... but the images aren't even preloaded.. bah.
- GreenAlien, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It doesnt work properly yet, but it's still interesting to see a semi-implemented version of Andy's design.
Original design at http://www.andyrutledge.com/google-redux.php
If whoever put that into html actually adds the javascript etc then it'll get my digg. But no digg yet.
BTW check out Andy's revamp design of ebay. He knows what he's doing.
In terms of site design and usability I've been very impressed with Mozilla's site for Firefox and Thundbird. Anyone wanting webdev pointers should check them out. - diafel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The design is appealing but it looks too much like every other pretentious and trendy blog.
- bdxphoenix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1See, this "working" redesign would never fly with me. The load time took too long (yes high speed internet, and it shouldn't matter). All your mouseovers are image replacements? why? CSS can easily do that with text and look just as nice. What about screen readers? People who cannot read the text will never know since your replacement is not done very well. And for usability sake the selection you are on should have something telling me so (How do i know if i'm doing a web search or not?)
It looks nice, but there are some major problems with it still.
No digg. - raccettura, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1My biggest complaint is the footer images used. Should be text with css :hover IMHO.
- ttntyler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It works now.
- Pooley, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It strikes me that you could modernise the current google homepage by simply changing the font to Verdana or Tahoma.
The previous arguments about link placement are meaningless on such a minimalist site.
This new design is extremely poor - using graphics for text and somehow managing to increase the main Google logo from 8k to 25k.
Anyway, like most of us, I never actually see the Google homepage as I search directly from the address bar. - h4lofourt33n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Works good, and I've set it as my default google page. Hope they have enough bandwith!
- stosh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's an ok design but it's not worth digging. Plus google doesn't need a subtitle or tagline....
"a world at your fingertips"
blah stupid - demesisx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Seeing this working only helps other people's argument FOR the real, simpler design.
It takes too long to load compared to the real thing. - zweben, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Motivo.... why didn't Dough tell me about this!?
(This is my friend's site....)
And all I see is a google front end with no images but it does work. Maybe he started over to make a working version? I think I missed something.
I am definitely going to talk to Dough about this... - timewarrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://digg.com/links/Fully_working_google_redesign
- mikedpirone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i like it...oddly enough it loads faster than the real google site.
- TheWorkz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No Digg.. I prefer Google's current homepage because it is damn fast and basic. No Distractions, ugly or not.
- Recluse, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It would be nice to see this on the the official google page. I'm really really tired of the old design.
- felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I haven't seen Andy Rutledge's work before. This guy is brilliant.
- kevinski, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Too many images. Has normal text gone out of style or something?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Looks Ugly.
Doesn't use ClearType ( all text are images ).
No digg for sure!!!!! - homeobocks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's like crap. Everthing's cramped together, and I don't think the new placements are any more logical than the old ones. Graphic designers aren't necessarily any good at making /usable/ interfaces between humans and computers.
- whisperedlie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0hate it. agreed that the blue bar is distracting. the mouseovers over the search bar look bad and are unnecessary, and the links in the blue at the bottom look bad as well. also, why so many images? css could have been implemented to cut down on a bunch of needless images (such as mouseover links). you gotta keep in mind that all of those images and whatnot take up bandwidth, no matter how small. with the amount of traffic google gets, even the smallest image can have a large affect on bandwidth.
- BugMeNot2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Andy Rutledge doesn't like Digg.
- NoahK, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't like this redesign. The blue bar at the bottom is distracting...
- LazyBoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It would be cool if we could somehow make this design for all of google with like css with firefox extensions and whatnot...doubt its possible.
- Misunderstood, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"What exactly do "designers" do all day? I could have done this in 5 minutes or less. What's the big deal? Am I missing something? Is this going to be in a coffee table book 20 years from now? If so, why?"
Then why didnt you do it. Or, why not make it better? - SamKellett, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm sorry but some of these comments are ***** stupid. "it goes back to google.com", "this is the same as the one earlier". It's a design concept for you to see what it looks like in HTML and CSS, not just an Image. Not another working Google. ***** idiots.
- functioncode, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0this guys a total hypocrite. his homepage has a lil rant about digg and its users, and in it is says the color blue sucks. and look at him, his new redesign has 2 big blocky blue bars in it...
- simpat1zq, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0yeah, but can they do it and keep the size the same?
- Tobey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yeah... this isn't that great.
- redalert, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0i dont like it
- WrecksTXP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0rollover images need to be preloaded with the page load. otherwise, I like it.
- theundone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The only thing that I would say might improve over the current google page is if the Web, Images, Groups, News, etc had radio buttons so you could select which to search without reloading the page after you've already typed in a search. Who really cares about the other links though? lol
- dognose, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Interesting, the same stuff while using 10x the bandwidth.
Here is the analysis:
google.com: 10041 bytes in 2 files
new design: 94135 bytes in 28 files - ericpp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Too many unnecessary graphics
- titaniumdecoy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This design is much, much worse than the real Google.
- crackheadjon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There's not a "help" link on the front page. How's my mother ever going to learn how to use advanced search operators?
- ragmop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0don't like it one bit
- inotocracy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It does look nice, but you also have to take into concideration the amount of traffic Google gets. With this new design it would probably tripple the amount of bandwidth required to serve the home page! I feel they go with the minimalistic approach, not only because its straight forward and functional, but because it saves on bandwidth.
- pacificdave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@RoyArne: i did... and didn't see a problem.
personally, i think that Google should test a design as this to see if the public would like it.... with better coding of course... and not under their home domain. i think it's a beautiful design. - RoyArne, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is horrible. Try resizing it, and you'll see why.
- jammen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0great design, just reduce the amount of blue displayed on the bottom half. rather move that border down and just have more white space in the middle
- shakebabies, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0No.
- CunningLinguist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If you want functionality this is my homepage google.
http://goototal.blogspot.com/ - felchdonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm curious - out of the people who don't like Andy Rutledge's designs, what do you do for a living?
This is a serious question, because I'm wondering if it's designers that don't like it, software engineers, students, what? -
Show 51 - 100 of 114 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is