|
|
Posted by Jon on 01/19/06 17:18
I dug up and read this study, very interesting. Though I don't feel our
sites are aesthetically bad, it's nice to know how quickly a site fails to
hold a user.
So what's the fix regarding CMS then? On one hand, our users want the
flexibility of a CMS (instead of the pain of Contribute or other methods),
but on the other by nature our sites become somewhat static because of the
CMS - in particular with the 1-page design.
Is it feesable to include different areas on a page that can be activated,
or deactivated on the fly via the CMS? Say a small table on the right hand
side of one content area, that is only there if the contentID meets the
condition? What are you doing to ensure your sites don't fall into the
aesthetic vs flexibility problem?
Thank you for all the help to all btw - I'm hoping this thread continues a
bit for more ideas, but there's my thanks now :p
Adam - I'd also like to see that mod_rewrite code - I've never worked with
this at all, and am kind of interested. I like the fact that we can clean
our URLs up while keeping the current functionality we have.
"G.E.M.P" <slowtorture@spammers.com> wrote in message
news:NJ-dnV6Affp3AVLeRVn-uQ@bresnan.com...
>
> I had another CMS thought (CMS design and behavior is one of
> my favorite subjects).
>
> Slashdot ran a new item a day or two ago, about a UK
> study suggesting websurfers judget websites in a few
> nanoseconds. In other words, most surfers decide almost
> instantly whether they want to continue exploring a
> site or not.
>
> That fits my own experience: that's what I do.
> And one of the key nano-second decision makers for
> me happens when my brower updates to yet another CMS
> generated site, that not only looks just like a ten
> thousand other such sites, it, like all of its cousins,
> looks bad.
>
> To be successful, CMS technology needs to provide more
> administrative flexibility in layout design, and they need
> to avoid those ugly three column, one or two horizontal
> header rectangle layouts that all get filled with
> jive random text.
>
> It takes me about a nano second to recognize those sites,
> and the first thing I do is click back to another tab, to
> get away as fast as I can.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|