[website] redesign and content
Has anyone seen http://beta.python.org/ recently? Aside from minor details I think it's a wonderful design. And the content! Unbelievably great promotional material. Just look at some of the subtopics of http://beta.python.org/about. It would be great to have something like that for Boost. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
Has anyone seen http://beta.python.org/ recently? Aside from minor details I think it's a wonderful design. And the content! Unbelievably great promotional material. Just look at some of the subtopics of http://beta.python.org/about. It would be great to have something like that for Boost.
Just http://www.python.org/ looks pretty good to me. Is it any different from http://beta.python.org/ ? If so, I can not see it.
Edward Diener <eddielee@tropicsoft.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Has anyone seen http://beta.python.org/ recently? Aside from minor details I think it's a wonderful design. And the content! Unbelievably great promotional material. Just look at some of the subtopics of http://beta.python.org/about. It would be great to have something like that for Boost.
Just http://www.python.org/ looks pretty good to me. Is it any different from http://beta.python.org/ ? If so, I can not see it.
No, it's the same. I meant to point at the main site, not at the old beta site, which was rolled out some time ago. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
Has anyone seen http://beta.python.org/ recently? Aside from minor details I think it's a wonderful design. And the content! Unbelievably great promotional material. Just look at some of the subtopics of http://beta.python.org/about. It would be great to have something like that for Boost.
I have to say that I dislike the look of that site and I consider its home page a good example of how a home page should not be designed. At 1024x768 there are three screenfuls of information and only the third one contains information that may be of any interest after the first time you visited the site, and that's assuming you know next to nothing about Python the first time. Together with the ACCU one and Boost's own, I'm sorry to say, that's another site that was recently redesigned and where the result doesn't strike me as a clear improvement over the previous one. Cheers, Nicola Musatti
It looks fine at 1600 x 1200 ;-) But I immediately switched to the user plain Times Roman font setting to be able to read it without eye strain. Which shows the impossibility of pleasing many of the people much of time. I don't find the new Boost site appearance an real improvement over the previous plain vanilla version. I think we should stop obsessing about appearance and concentrate on content - which is already pretty good. Paul -- Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB Phone and SMS text +44 1539 561830, Mobile and SMS text +44 7714 330204 mailto: pbristow@hetp.u-net.com http://www.hetp.u-net.com/index.html http://www.hetp.u-net.com/Paul%20A%20Bristow%20info.html | -----Original Message----- | From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org | [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Nicola Musatti | Sent: 22 March 2006 08:02 | To: boost@lists.boost.org | Subject: Re: [boost] [website] redesign and content | | David Abrahams wrote: | | > Has anyone seen http://beta.python.org/ recently? Aside from minor | > details I think it's a wonderful design. And the content! | > Unbelievably great promotional material. Just look at some of the | > subtopics of http://beta.python.org/about. It would be | great to have | > something like that for Boost. | | I have to say that I dislike the look of that site and I consider its | home page a good example of how a home page should not be | designed. At | 1024x768 there are three screenfuls of information and only the third | one contains information that may be of any interest after the first | time you visited the site, and that's assuming you know next | to nothing | about Python the first time. | | Together with the ACCU one and Boost's own, I'm sorry to say, that's | another site that was recently redesigned and where the | result doesn't | strike me as a clear improvement over the previous one. | | Cheers, | Nicola Musatti | | _______________________________________________ | Unsubscribe & other changes: | http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost |
"Paul A Bristow" <pbristow@hetp.u-net.com> writes:
It looks fine at 1600 x 1200 ;-)
But I immediately switched to the user plain Times Roman font setting to be able to read it without eye strain.
Which shows the impossibility of pleasing many of the people much of time.
Sure, the font choices aren't perfect for me either. But the overall design is pleasing.
I don't find the new Boost site appearance an real improvement over the previous plain vanilla version.
I think we should stop obsessing about appearance and concentrate on content - which is already pretty good.
The appearance /is/ content: it communicates something about the organization and the quality of its work. I happen to think the other content on the Boost site could be improved a lot too :) -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti@gmail.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Has anyone seen http://beta.python.org/ recently? Aside from minor details I think it's a wonderful design. And the content! Unbelievably great promotional material. Just look at some of the subtopics of http://beta.python.org/about. It would be great to have something like that for Boost.
I have to say that I dislike the look of that site and I consider its home page a good example of how a home page should not be designed. At 1024x768 there are three screenfuls of information and only the third one contains information that may be of any interest after the first time you visited the site, and that's assuming you know next to nothing about Python the first time.
That's fine, I think. What do I ever want that's on the Boost homepage other than a link to some other part of the site? Not much, I must say. Do you want to see something else on Boost's homepage? We can't put everything there. It seems to me that filling the homepage with content of interest to first- and second-time visitors is about the best thing we can use it for.
Together with the ACCU one and Boost's own, I'm sorry to say, that's another site that was recently redesigned and where the result doesn't strike me as a clear improvement over the previous one.
What do you think would be an improvement. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti@gmail.com> writes: [...]
I have to say that I dislike the look of that site and I consider its home page a good example of how a home page should not be designed. At 1024x768 there are three screenfuls of information and only the third one contains information that may be of any interest after the first time you visited the site, and that's assuming you know next to nothing about Python the first time.
That's fine, I think. What do I ever want that's on the Boost homepage other than a link to some other part of the site? Not much, I must say. Do you want to see something else on Boost's homepage? We can't put everything there. It seems to me that filling the homepage with content of interest to first- and second-time visitors is about the best thing we can use it for.
I was referring to the Python site in that case. Boost's choice is reasonable because just about the only interesting things in returning to these home pages are news headlines. Note that the Python home page was modified yesterday so that news aren't hidden towards the bottom of the page.
Together with the ACCU one and Boost's own, I'm sorry to say, that's another site that was recently redesigned and where the result doesn't strike me as a clear improvement over the previous one.
What do you think would be an improvement.
First off let me say that I'm well aware that this is a voluntary effort and I do believe that he who does decides how. I also know that some decisions were taken by vote, such as the choice of logo, so my voice carries very little weight and that's how it should be. The new site looks certainly slicker and more professional, but I find it unremarkable. This is probably due to different things. The choice of colours is a little bit dull; the new logo isn't bad looking, but it doesn't convey in any way what Boost stands for; the overall effect of a sheet of paper hovering above a darker background is apparenly what everybody does nowadays, not to mention that it wastes precious horizontal space and compresses the main text column, especially if one displays the browser's sidebar. Nothing really terrible, as you see, but in a way I feel that the old web site had more personality, even if it didn't depart much from how all web sites used to look in the mid nineties. Cheers, Nicola Musatti
Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti@gmail.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti@gmail.com> writes: [...]
I have to say that I dislike the look of that site and I consider its home page a good example of how a home page should not be designed. At 1024x768 there are three screenfuls of information and only the third one contains information that may be of any interest after the first time you visited the site, and that's assuming you know next to nothing about Python the first time.
That's fine, I think. What do I ever want that's on the Boost homepage other than a link to some other part of the site? Not much, I must say. Do you want to see something else on Boost's homepage? We can't put everything there. It seems to me that filling the homepage with content of interest to first- and second-time visitors is about the best thing we can use it for.
I was referring to the Python site in that case. Boost's choice is reasonable because just about the only interesting things in returning to these home pages are news headlines. Note that the Python home page was modified yesterday so that news aren't hidden towards the bottom of the page.
Good; the news were pushed too far down.
Together with the ACCU one and Boost's own, I'm sorry to say, that's another site that was recently redesigned and where the result doesn't strike me as a clear improvement over the previous one.
What do you think would be an improvement.
First off let me say that I'm well aware that this is a voluntary effort and I do believe that he who does decides how. I also know that some decisions were taken by vote, such as the choice of logo, so my voice carries very little weight and that's how it should be.
The new site looks certainly slicker and more professional, but I find it unremarkable. This is probably due to different things. The choice of colours is a little bit dull; the new logo isn't bad looking, but it doesn't convey in any way what Boost stands for; the overall effect of a sheet of paper hovering above a darker background is apparenly what everybody does nowadays, not to mention that it wastes precious horizontal space and compresses the main text column, especially if one displays the browser's sidebar.
Nothing really terrible, as you see, but in a way I feel that the old web site had more personality, even if it didn't depart much from how all web sites used to look in the mid nineties.
I asked you to explain what would be an improvement. I appreciate the effort, but this is just a complaint. An explanation of what would amount to an improvement could be really useful. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
I asked you to explain what would be an improvement. I appreciate the effort, but this is just a complaint. An explanation of what would amount to an improvement could be really useful.
By the way, have you seen the newer design in progress at http://boost.redshift-software.com/ ? -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
By the way, have you seen the newer design in progress at http://boost.redshift-software.com/ ?
I like it. Nigel
David Abrahams wrote:
David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
I asked you to explain what would be an improvement. I appreciate the effort, but this is just a complaint. An explanation of what would amount to an improvement could be really useful.
By the way, have you seen the newer design in progress at http://boost.redshift-software.com/ ?
I do prefer it to the corrent one. A few notes: I have the impression that there's a slight mismatch in the shades of the top image and the hyperlink style. They might look better if they were exactly the same or clearly different. Consider adding a different color. One idea could be a warm shade of yellow. You could use a stronger version for the navigation buttons and a lighter one for the boxes, in place of the current grey. Consider either displaying a window length menubar or a separator right above the buttons. The navigation box to the right should go above the search one, not below. The "Get Boost" font is a bit too large. Consider moving it to the right hand side of the navigation menu bar (where Motif's help button used to be). See? Some of these *are* suggestions ;-) Cheers, Nicola Musatti
Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti@gmail.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
I asked you to explain what would be an improvement. I appreciate the effort, but this is just a complaint. An explanation of what would amount to an improvement could be really useful.
By the way, have you seen the newer design in progress at http://boost.redshift-software.com/ ?
I do prefer it to the corrent one. A few notes:
I have the impression that there's a slight mismatch in the shades of the top image and the hyperlink style. They might look better if they were exactly the same or clearly different.
Probably.
Consider adding a different color.
I like that idea in principle.
One idea could be a warm shade of yellow. You could use a stronger version for the navigation buttons and a lighter one for the boxes, in place of the current grey. Consider either displaying a window length menubar or a separator right above the buttons.
I'd have to see that to believe it was better. What I can visualize doesn't look so good to me.
The navigation box to the right should go above the search one, not below.
Then the search box will move up and down as the page changes. Seems like a bad idea to me.
The "Get Boost" font is a bit too large.
By what criterion? Actually I note that it seems to be too large and not correctly aligned in the box when viewing the page at larger font sizes. It actually overlaps the bottom of its surrounding box (FireFox).
Consider moving it to the right hand side of the navigation menu bar (where Motif's help button used to be).
It would have to be a *lot* smaller than it is now to fit there, wouldn't it?
See? Some of these *are* suggestions ;-)
Thank you :) -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com
David Abrahams wrote:
Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti@gmail.com> writes:
I have the impression that there's a slight mismatch in the shades of the top image and the hyperlink style. They might look better if they were exactly the same or clearly different.
Probably.
WRT banner, I've expressed this all along and I will say it again: the banner background is too busy and tend to distract. It sits in the same focal depth as the main logo and the quote. The translucent tape-like thing that intends to bring the quote to the front does not cut it. It's a bad solution to the problem which simply is: that the background is too sharp and too busy. Ditto to the airbrushed logo. Bad solution, IMO. Cheers, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Joel de Guzman wrote: [...]
WRT banner, I've expressed this all along and I will say it again: the banner background is too busy and tend to distract. It sits in the same focal depth as the main logo and the quote. The translucent tape-like thing that intends to bring the quote to the front does not cut it. It's a bad solution to the problem which simply is: that the background is too sharp and too busy. Ditto to the airbrushed logo. Bad solution, IMO.
A solution could be to fade it from very dark blue to the left side into the current image on the right. It might end up looking too IBM'ish, though. Cheers, Nicola Musatti
"David Abrahams" <dave@boost-consulting.com> wrote in message news:uveu2vtqe.fsf@boost-consulting.com...
Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti@gmail.com> writes:
David Abrahams wrote:
David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com> writes:
I asked you to explain what would be an improvement. I appreciate the effort, but this is just a complaint. An explanation of what would amount to an improvement could be really useful.
By the way, have you seen the newer design in progress at http://boost.redshift-software.com/ ?
its a good ad for Google ! ... ;-) regards Andy Little
"Andy Little" wrote
its a good ad for Google ! ... ;-)
I guess thats a negative remark. Anyway the Google logo is cleverly designed to stand out.(Hats off to the Google team !) It does so much more in this design because it contains the only warm colours on the whole site, the rest of which is the coldest possible blue. OTOH if you coloured 'Get Boost' in Orange, The opposite colour to blue and blended the border around it to soften the impact a bit... regards Andy Little
participants (7)
-
Andy Little -
David Abrahams -
Edward Diener -
Joel de Guzman -
Nicola Musatti -
Nigel Stewart -
Paul A Bristow