Good Sites - who's got some examples?

[Whitecrest]

Here is one that I like. I am sure that the zealots on here
will instantly roll their eyes.
http://www.subaru.com/

Cool site, I would much rather surf there, than some all text and
pictures site.

 

[Whitecrest]

If it prevented the purpose of bringing the visitor to your website, you'd
be a real wombat for chosing Flash.

So what you are saying is that even though I have found that my web site
will make more money if I use flash. The fact that someone may not see
it, over rides my right to make a bigger profit.

Yea, that works for me....

 

[EightNineThree]

And my statement still stands. Not every product is marketed to every
single consumer in the world.

Everyone needs food, genius.


--
Karl Core

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not
cease to be insipid.
Friedrich Nietzsche

eightninethree AT eightninethree.com

 

[Isofarro]

If you truly believe this, then I would never want you near
a web site that I am involved with.

So you don't believe a web site should work properly on the world wide web.
How odd.

Design is a critical
element for most people who want a site built

If you believe that, then that would be good grounds never to consider
hiring you, and chose an expert design agency instead.

Most people have the design aspect as one of the most
important things they consider when requesting that a
site be built.

A website where design is more important than content - about as useful to a
customer as a hole in the head. A website where desing is more important
than readability - another useless blackhole. A website with accessible
content - now there's something thats useful.

 

[m]

Mark Jones wrote:

Consider for a moment "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs"[1] as it may be applied
to a www document.

[1] for example: http://web.utk.edu/~gwynne/maslow.htm

(dead link)

However, I'm familiar with
Maslow's heirarchy-of-needs theory.
It's not very scientific and soooo 1970s --
"Being Psychology" "peak experiences"
"self actualization" ... Oh! Atlantis!


However, I agree that
content comes first,
prettyness second,
at least on sites
where the design does not
constitute the content...

 

[Whitecrest]

Everyone needs food, genius.

There are other markets other than food genius.... Hence the sentence
"Not _every_ product is marketed to _every_ singe consumer in the world.

The sentence did not say "NO product in the world" , it said, "Not every
product" Now don't you feel like a dope....

 

[Paul Goodwin]

The design of a website is irrelevant, all that matters is its content and
its readability.

Tell that to a corporate CEO looking to hire you to build a site for him and
you'll soon be outside looking in. All that matters to *me* is what the
client wants. If he wants a flash splash page I can give him the reasons why
this isn't a good idea, but if he's hell bent on a flash splash page then
that's what he shall have. His money is entirely "relevant" to me ;-)

 

[Whitecrest]

Only people with javascript enabled browsers buy cars. *snicker*
Must have paid the "designer" an absolute mint to come up with that sort of
tripe.

I am pretty sure Subaru did a little research before switching to this
format. And they found that they sold more cards pissing off the anti-
javascript people then they did when they had a plain Jane site.

 

[Isofarro]

Mark Jones pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:

<rolls eyes>

http://www.subaru.com/nojs.html

Only people with javascript enabled browsers buy cars. *snicker*
Must have paid the "designer" an absolute mint to come up with that sort of
tripe.

 

[Liz]

In message <[email protected]>

That just about wraps it all up.

Actually it can be quite useful.
I can judge a lot about a company's customer service by the way they respond
to "I can't access your site/page". If they just say, "Update your browser"
without checking whether it's possible, they don't get my sale: their after
sales support is very likely to be nil.

If they respond in another way, e.g. by pleasantly offering to snail me a
brochure, or responding to an enquiry by email, or whavever is appropriate,
it's more hopeful, so I'm happier doing business with them.

It can be a useful filter.

(Mind you, I'd have to be fairly committed to bother emailing them: usually
if it's just a 'no plug in' page, an empty javascript page or, conversely, a
boringly formatted one (my browser doesn't support CSS) I just go elsewhere.

Liz

 

[Mark Jones]

Mark Jones pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:

<rolls eyes>

http://www.subaru.com/nojs.html

The answer is simple. Don't cripple your browser.

 

[Mark Jones]

Everyone needs food, genius.

So, you are saying that all food is marketed by only one company?

 

[William Tasso]

[1] for example: ...

Should be: http://web.utk.edu/~gwynne/maslow.html

Thanks

 

[Mark Jones]

Cool site, I would much rather surf there, than some all text and
pictures site.

I thought so. Too many people on alt.html want to complain
about sites using JavaScript and Flash, but what they fail to
understand is that their view of what the web should be is
out of line with what people are actually doing and wanting.

I very much prefer the way most of the automakers are
building their sites as opposed to the way some people
on here think a site should be built.

 

[Mark Jones]

A website where design is more important than content - about as useful to a
customer as a hole in the head. A website where desing is more important
than readability - another useless blackhole. A website with accessible
content - now there's something thats useful.

Then you are out of touch with how most web sites are
being done for corporations. The appearance of the
site is the very first thing that is settled and then the
content is added within this design context.

The appearance of the site is used to enhance the image
of the corporation, just like print ads are used. The fact
that you do not like this is beside the point. It is what
corporations are asking for and it is what they are getting.

Most corporate web sites that I have visited have a very
strong design element. It is obvious on these sites that
a lot of time went into determining how the site looks.
This almost always involves the use of JavaScript and
frequently the use of Flash.

 

[William Tasso]

I am pretty sure Subaru did a little research before switching to this
format.

ok - the results of that research would be dead interesting. do you have a
reference?

And they found that they sold more cards pissing off the anti-
javascript people then they did when they had a plain Jane site.

really? I, for one, would be real impressed with some decent demographic
stats on that outcome.

 

[William Tasso]

So, you are saying that all food is marketed by only one company?

Not yet - give it time.

 

[Mark Jones]

Tell that to a corporate CEO looking to hire you to build a site for him and
you'll soon be outside looking in. All that matters to *me* is what the
client wants. If he wants a flash splash page I can give him the reasons why
this isn't a good idea, but if he's hell bent on a flash splash page then
that's what he shall have. His money is entirely "relevant" to me ;-)

Isofarro evidently does not care for this aspect of web design.

He wants the web to be the way he wants it to be and to
hell with anyone who disagrees. Personally, I will build
a site to whatever requirements the owner wants.

That can include frames, fixed width, flexible layout,
Flash, JavaScript, database integration, lots of pictures,
no pictures, or whatever else they want that I am able
to do.

Isofarro wants these complex sites that do not work for
every browser and user platform to go away. It isn't
going to happen as long as people keep asking for complex
sites and people keep building them.

 

[EightNineThree]

Tell that to a corporate CEO looking to hire you to build a site for him

Corporate CEOs are morons.
CEOs/ Chairmen/ Presidents or whatever their title is may know a lot about
*their* business and what it does.
When it comes to web development, they know jack-shit. A smart one would
know to STFU and let a qualified expert do their job with little intrusion.


--
Karl Core

At times one remains faithful to a cause only because its opponents do not
cease to be insipid.
Friedrich Nietzsche

eightninethree AT eightninethree.com

 

[Nicolai P. Zwar]

Mark Jones wrote:




So you don't believe a web site should work properly on the world wide web.
How odd.

On what basis do you now claim Mark allegedly believes that a web site
should not work properly on the world wide web?

If you believe that, then that would be good grounds never to consider
hiring you, and chose an expert design agency instead.

If you don't believe that, I wonder who would hire you to design a web site.

A website where design is more important than content - about as useful to a
customer as a hole in the head. A website where desing is more important
than readability - another useless blackhole. A website with accessible
content - now there's something thats useful.

You have still not understood. You are simplistically shooting against
those who put design ahead of content because it makes it easier for you
to argue against it. Except that you are arguing in a vacuum, because
nobody here is actually holding that position.

But if, on the other hand, you actually go ahead and claim that the
design of a corn flakes box, a car, a magazine, or a web site has no
bearing on its success, than you seem pretty clueless about human
psychology.