blog.gojobby.com— Interesting blog entry (by a designer) supporting the "ugly design" theory. Contains some links to some other good discussions and articles on the subject.
Apr 27, 2006View in Crawl 4
The problem is that people tend to think in extremes rather than in shades of difference. Of course form should follow function, but for many that means "ugly." If you look through about 90% of the OSS web applications, they look terrible to the point where you wouldn't really want to be looking at it every day which, even if usable, doesn't bring in users.Consider c|net of 5 years ago...That site was impossible to navigate and hard to find specific things. The philosophy of most users was, "If I find it...I better download it now! I'll never find it again." Now they present the same information in a new format and it's much more manageable. But that new format highlights content people are looking for, and has some aesthetically pleasing characteristics. You cannot throw out the baby with the bathwater in either graphic design or usability! Similarly, you cannot ignore the draw of an aesthetically pleasing design. People respond better to things that look good. T-Mobile doesn't use Katherine Zeta-Jones because they couldn't find some bookish looking acne faced girl. They use her because she has a look that sells.ALL the functionality and ease of use in the world cannot be overcome by an unpleasing design.
Pile,Fixed-width page vs. Liquid design page...it's a matter of choices not of good v bad. You should check out this article: <a class="user" href="http://www.thinkvitamin.com/features/design/making-popular-layout-decisions">http://www.thinkvitamin.com/features/design/making-popular-layout-decisions</a>I would argue that fixed width serves most readers better as a design decisions because:1 - It's easier to read shorter width columns than longer ones (supported by Jakob Nielsen)2 - The white-space to the left & right of the main content can be visually appealing if dressed up well (visit: <a class="user" href="http://www.visitnc.com/)">http://www.visitnc.com/)</a>3 - It makes text rendering MUCH easier on both the designer & the readerThose are just three off the top of my head...but I'd hardly call fixed-width "one of the worst bad-design flaws ever" because, quite frankly, you're not supported by much evidence other than personal preference. So don't try to be a design authority about that particular decision for the author.
@jgreeneSerif fonts exist with a very good reason, but indeed they have poor readability on screens. This is why people should respect CSS media types, especially screen and printer. All major browsers support it, no webdesigner does.
Digging your own blog article is beyond pathetic. I am convinced, now more than ever, that this is all some half-baked publicity stunt to promote Jobby. Weak.
chakzApr 28, 2006
My screens 15.4" at 1680 x 1050 and I like my text on Medium. All lcd's only look good at their native resolution.
kmedlinApr 28, 2006
The problem is that people tend to think in extremes rather than in shades of difference. Of course form should follow function, but for many that means "ugly." If you look through about 90% of the OSS web applications, they look terrible to the point where you wouldn't really want to be looking at it every day which, even if usable, doesn't bring in users.Consider c|net of 5 years ago...That site was impossible to navigate and hard to find specific things. The philosophy of most users was, "If I find it...I better download it now! I'll never find it again." Now they present the same information in a new format and it's much more manageable. But that new format highlights content people are looking for, and has some aesthetically pleasing characteristics. You cannot throw out the baby with the bathwater in either graphic design or usability! Similarly, you cannot ignore the draw of an aesthetically pleasing design. People respond better to things that look good. T-Mobile doesn't use Katherine Zeta-Jones because they couldn't find some bookish looking acne faced girl. They use her because she has a look that sells.ALL the functionality and ease of use in the world cannot be overcome by an unpleasing design.
kmedlinApr 28, 2006
Pile,Fixed-width page vs. Liquid design page...it's a matter of choices not of good v bad. You should check out this article: <a class="user" href="http://www.thinkvitamin.com/features/design/making-popular-layout-decisions">http://www.thinkvitamin.com/features/design/making-popular-layout-decisions</a>I would argue that fixed width serves most readers better as a design decisions because:1 - It's easier to read shorter width columns than longer ones (supported by Jakob Nielsen)2 - The white-space to the left & right of the main content can be visually appealing if dressed up well (visit: <a class="user" href="http://www.visitnc.com/)">http://www.visitnc.com/)</a>3 - It makes text rendering MUCH easier on both the designer & the readerThose are just three off the top of my head...but I'd hardly call fixed-width "one of the worst bad-design flaws ever" because, quite frankly, you're not supported by much evidence other than personal preference. So don't try to be a design authority about that particular decision for the author.
Closed AccountApr 28, 2006
Can somebody say <a class="user" href="http://www.craigslist.org/">http://www.craigslist.org/</a> ?
enzomediciApr 28, 2006
Most of the successful sites are ugly.Google, Amazon, Ebay, Yahoo, Hotmail, Slashdot....are all ugly.
eviltakApr 28, 2006
A better Read Easily link is: <a class="user" href="https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1224/">https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/1224/</a>
tybrisApr 28, 2006
@jgreeneSerif fonts exist with a very good reason, but indeed they have poor readability on screens. This is why people should respect CSS media types, especially screen and printer. All major browsers support it, no webdesigner does.
mrassmanApr 29, 2006
craigslist.comprepare for hyperlink rape when visiting.
yellowbookApr 29, 2006
People *do* like ugly things - how else could my girlfriend get to reproduce? I suppose I could pimp her out but not sure who'd pay.
jaredigitalApr 29, 2006
Digging your own blog article is beyond pathetic. I am convinced, now more than ever, that this is all some half-baked publicity stunt to promote Jobby. Weak.