|
|
Posted by Alan J. Flavell on 06/02/06 20:35
On Wed, 31 May 2006, dorayme wrote:
> What are your or anyone's favourite examples of serious
> commercial
Well, aside from Google (whose HTML is dreadful, even though it does
the job), I don't off-hand have a commercial example to offer, but, of
the various pages that I use professionally, I must say the ones based
on Mediawiki behave very nicely, in terms of calmly adjusting
themselves across a fairly wide range of viewing situations - this can
be seen, for example, with the wikipedia itself. There's a few little
things that I'd like to improve, but by and large it behaves much
better than the typical over-designed "commercial" pages that I need
to deal with.
> (with much product and complexity, need for photos)
Excuse me, but cramming-in the maximum amount of stuff per page is
*not* the sign of a designer who understands the web. It confuses the
would-be customer, quite apart from annoying experienced webnauts.
When a company has (let's say) several thousands of products in their
repertoire, then cramming as many of them as possible onto the front
page ought not to be their first priority. Devising good ways to
navigate, and help the customer find the right product, *should* be.
Having to deal with various commercial sites, there seem to be
basically two kinds:
* those where the site is better navigated using google
* those which contrive to prevent google from indexing them
You can probably work out what I think about that, hmmm?
> webpages that enable some folk to enjoy the benefits of their big
> screens (normal landscape/approx.4:3) while avoiding irritating
> those with a 700px limit?
"limit" wouldn't be accurate. When the content - in and of itself -
calls for a big screen, then I'll use it. Such as 1024 on the laptop,
or 2 x 1280 on the desk. But when I'm merely browsing around, then
I'll have other things going on elsewhere on the screen, and I don't
want the browser window hogging all the width. The browser window
usually gets given around 700px on the laptop, *unless and until*
there's something that in my opinion needs more. And the mere fact
that an author tried to stick too many things side by side is not the
kind of thing that persuades me that it "needs" more - it should
damned-well adjust itself to *my* browser window (and of course to
anyone else's), and not the other way around.
> Yes, all is a trade off.
No disagreement there.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|