New Python.org website ?

[Tim Parkin]

Shalabh,

You've managed very well to express the same things I feel about the
new Python website.

What I especially dislike about the new website are the flashy pictures
on the front-page with no content and no purpose -- purely boasting but
nothing to back up your claims.

Thats because the content hasn't been written yet. We're concentrating
on getting the existing copy over first.

(I wouldn't mind some sleek pictures there if they weren't desperatly
trying to advertise success-stories but instead would link to real
content!)

I do like to overall look-and-feel of the beta site but I hope the bad
bits get fixed before launch!

Can you give me a list of bad bits to fix (or you could add them to the
trac site at psf.pollenation.net)

Tim

 

[Tim Parkin]

Steve,

My apologies if this apppeared to be 'slagging'. I was trying to give
some feedback but I do realize that I don't have anything better to
offer yet to replace the pictures I dislike.

Perhaps I should have withheld my criticisms until I could offer an
alternative. (Still thinking about what could be there instead of those
3 pictures. But I'd like there to be some actual real Python content,
or links to events from the Python Events Calender; or perhaps links to
large python projects like Zope -- something that links to the major
parts of Python. Perhaps 1 picture that links to Python Web Development
including things like Zope, Django, etc; another picture that links to
a page giving overview of major IDEs for Python; and 3d picture that
links to page with Python Event calender... Something along those
lines. But I don't have any graphics for you.)

That sounds fine.. I think having a link to a high profile user of
python would be very useful though. I agree the XP link is a bit shite.
Hopefully we'd get the photos and links to success
stories/events/software changing every now and again..

how about

1) High profile user of Python
2) Link to upcoming python event
3) Link to web development uses of python

the only problem is

1) people will argue over which user of python to put up
2) This will probably just be pycon and europython.. which is no bad
thing.. until we get more than two conferences at similar times.. which
one should we show?
3) python isn't just about web development..

Suffice it to say we'll have some content and the example images will
change every now and again.

btw do you have a problem with using nasa or astrazeneca as example high
profile users?

Tim

 

[Tim Parkin]

Tim N. van der Leeuw schreef:



FWIW, I don't like the new site at all. It tries to look slick (but
fails to do so in my opinion), and buries the useful information in all
kinds of misplaced eye candy.

In fact I like the old one better: short, clear and to the point.

Can you make some specific comments about which 'eye candy' that you
find objectionable and which parts of the navigation structure you find
confusing?

Tim

 

[Tim Parkin]

[Shalabh Chaturvedi]

| Hm. Am I the only one not particularly impressed? Sure the
| front page is
| 'slick' but a few clicks reveal a fairly shallow facade of marketing
| material, with no real content. In general gives the impression of
| 'phony' company trying to make a big impression. Most good non-tech
| managers are very wary of such organizations/companies.

[... snip similar stuff highlighting the relative
lightweightness of the content ...]

Ummm. I might have missed the point, and certainly what I'm about
to say is based on no more than my reading between the lines of
Steve's original announcement, but... I see the current beta
site as a layout/display/look-and-feel beta, *not* a content
beta, at least no more than is absolutely necessary to support
the look-and-feel.

Hi Tim,

Yep, the most effort has gone into deciding what level of change is
really necessary . Which is not a lot. The navigation has been
rearranged very slightly so that there is a consistent left hand
navigation throughout the site. The layout of the site has been changed
from table based to css based. The templates should be valid xhtml. etc.

As I've mentioned, new content needs writing and some content needs
updating but the biggest job is migrating the old content over. We'd
also like to get content from the wiki into the website (so it can be
mirrored).

Now I might be wrong, in which case your comments are pretty
much justified. But it looks to me as though most of the
content was banged in a year or so ago (or more, maybe) to
give a this-kind-of-blurb feel, some or all of which would
be replaced with current and agreed blurb before the thing
went live.

Most of the content that is currently on beta.python.org was added in
the last three months. Most of the top level content is about 9 months old.

You might argue that the beta shouldn't have been unveiled
without suitable text etc. But I would say: well done to
the people who've made the effort and put the beta
together. It's been mentioned that the whole thing is
downloadable and open to contributions, so maybe that's
the way forward for you: make or implement your suggestions
and send them back to the maintainers.

If we never put it up as a beta, I would have had to finish the whole
job on my own (which is a bit tough whilst trying to run my own company,
although the psf have helped out in this).

I'm looking forward to getting the current content over and then helping
contribute to the content more...

Thanks for the comments..

Tim

 

[JW]

What I especially dislike about the new website are the flashy pictures
on the front-page with no content and no purpose -- purely boasting but
nothing to back up your claims.

(I wouldn't mind some sleek pictures there if they weren't desperatly
trying to advertise success-stories but instead would link to real
content!)

Tim the Taller (I presume he's taller; he's Dutch) and the other critics
fail to realize is that no one reads "content".

I'm assured that in print ads the only "content" anyone reads is in
picture captions, and you damn well better make sure your message is
conveyed there. Any other "content" only wastes space. I see no reason to
think that a web page should be designed using any other assumption.

If anything, Tim the Shorter (I presume he's shorter; he's not Dutch) has
too much "content" and too few images. The beta page is a great
improvement over the current "content-intensive" page.

I recommend David Ogilvy's "Ogilvy on Advertising" for a enthusiastic but
somewhat cynical view of the subject. It is a very old book, but nothing
about human nature has changed since it was written.

Jim Wilson
Gainesville, FL

 

[Tim Parkin]

Tim the Taller (I presume he's taller; he's Dutch) and the other critics
fail to realize is that no one reads "content".

I'm assured that in print ads the only "content" anyone reads is in
picture captions, and you damn well better make sure your message is
conveyed there. Any other "content" only wastes space. I see no reason to
think that a web page should be designed using any other assumption.

If anything, Tim the Shorter (I presume he's shorter; he's not Dutch) has
too much "content" and too few images. The beta page is a great
improvement over the current "content-intensive" page.

Yep, unfortunately the majority of people consider 'looks' important
(even when they say they think they don't) and judge a page before
they've read a single word. A recent article concluded that it can
sometimes take less than a tenth of a second for form a lasting opinion.

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/01/17/canada.websites.reut/index.html

But obviously the site has also got to contain relevant content and be
attractive to the majority of developers also.

I recommend David Ogilvy's "Ogilvy on Advertising" for a enthusiastic but
somewhat cynical view of the subject. It is a very old book, but nothing
about human nature has changed since it was written.

It's a very good book and still as relevant today as ever (I wish I had
my original copy.. altough it's still in print in multiple versions.)

Tim

 

[Paul McGuire]

I googled around and found no background on how the new Python logo
came to be selected. Does any one know why or how the logo shown in the
upper left corner of the beta.python.org site was choosen? Which other
logos were rejected? Is there a particular reason why it is shaped like
a cross?

Thanks

Looks like a plus sign to me, evoking the idea of "incremental improvement".
A cross (as in Christian symbol) really has an elongated leg to the bottom.
But it most closely resembles two snakes (see the little eyes
at the top and bottom?), presumably pythons.

Personally, I like the stylized snakes, and the symmetry of the logo, a big
improvement over the cartooney cutesy snakes we've seen in the past.

-- Paul

 

[Steve Holden]

Looks like a plus sign to me, evoking the idea of "incremental improvement".
A cross (as in Christian symbol) really has an elongated leg to the bottom.
But it most closely resembles two snakes (see the little eyes
at the top and bottom?), presumably pythons.

Personally, I like the stylized snakes, and the symmetry of the logo, a big
improvement over the cartooney cutesy snakes we've seen in the past.

That was pretty much what I thought. The intention was definitely to be
snake-like and resemble "Py" at the same time.

No reply yet on why Obaid wanted to know about the cross motif (though
one has one's suspicions).

regards
Steve

 

[Roel Schroeven]

Tim Parkin schreef:

Can you make some specific comments about which 'eye candy' that you
find objectionable and which parts of the navigation structure you find
confusing?

It's not easy because my perception of a website is formed by a general
impression; trying to explain or even find the origins of that
impression is actually some sort of rationalization after the fact.
Anyway, I'll try.

- As many people have mentioned, the images. An image can be perfectly
OK, but I don't like how they are used on the beta site. I kinda like
the one on http://www.joelonsoftware.com/ for example, though I can't
say exactly why I like that one and I don't like the images on
http://beta.python.org/.

- The site feels 'empty'. I think I found out why: it's the navigation.
To me, it feels like the navigation is strongly de-emphasized, almost as
if it's not meant to be used by the casual passer-by. It doesn't really
invite to explore the other pages of the site. The old site does a
better job of that, even though the navigation looks a bit chaotic.

- I'm not too fond of the sitemap link. On many sites a sitemap is
useful because sometimes it's the only way to navigate the site in a
sensible way, or to find all pages. In other words, a sitemap is only
needed if the normal navigation doesn't do a good enough job, and if
it's present it always makes me feel as if the website designer is
admitting that that indeed is the case.

- The boxes on the right don't feel right. Maybe it would be better with
other content in it, more directly relevant to the main text.

- The header is too empty. Maybe "The Official Python Programming
Language Website" should be there instead of under it. (I also think
that title should be shorter, maybe something simply like "The Python
Programming Language"

 

[Roel Schroeven]

JW schreef:

Tim the Taller (I presume he's taller; he's Dutch) and the other critics
fail to realize is that no one reads "content".

I'm assured that in print ads the only "content" anyone reads is in
picture captions, and you damn well better make sure your message is
conveyed there. Any other "content" only wastes space. I see no reason to
think that a web page should be designed using any other assumption.

I don't agree. I read websites in search for information (content), not
to find advertisements. If a site I want to visit looks too much like an
advertisement, I handle it the same as I handle any other advertisement:
throw it away.

I agree that the information shouldn't be presented in an overly dense
way, but it should be there prominently and easily accessible. The site
should invite users to read the content, the contrary of many corporate
websites that seem to try to hide it, almost like the fineprint on a
contract.

 

[Roel Schroeven]

Tim Parkin schreef:

Well apart from the front page and a couple of pages providing content
specific to different types of usersm the whole site is the same as it
was before. Do you have a problem with marketing python or with the
content of the python site? Could you expand on why you think the beta
site looks 'phony'?

I feel more or less the same, but I can't explain why. Maybe I can give
some examples of website that I think look good and bad.

Good:

.. http://www.flickr.com if you're logged in to the site (except for the
ad-like blocks in the left column)
.. http://www.mozilla.org
.. wikipedia
.. http://www.vmware.com/
.. http://www.google.com
.. gmail

'Phony':

.. http://www.flickr.com if you're not logged in
.. http://www.mysql.com
.. http://www.webdiv.be/ (site where insurance companies etc. can order
license plates for their customers; it's a strange mix between
commercial and governmental)
.. http://www.yahoo.com/
.. hotmail
.. http://www.portofantwerp.be/asp/start_pagina.asp
.. http://www.conocophillips.com/index.htm and many other large companies

In short, I think I don't judge a site solely on it's looks, but more
based on how much it makes me feel that it's going to deliver me the
content that I'm looking for. From experience (I guess) I associate the
large-company-look with hard-to-find-information.

 

[JW]

I, Jim Wilson, schreef:

I don't agree. I read websites in search for information (content), not to
find advertisements.

Yes, and I read Playboy for the interviews

I agree that the information shouldn't be presented in an overly dense
way,

Agreed. The main page should be like a slick book cover. It should grab
you and leave you wanting more. I think the beta page does that pretty
well.

but it should be there prominently and easily accessible.

All you should have to do is open the book. Or click a link.

The site
should invite users to read the content, the contrary of many corporate
websites that seem to try to hide it, almost like the fineprint on a
contract.

In another post, you mention http://www.joelonsoftware.com/ which appears
to be some sort of blog (the current bane of the internet). I immediately
noticed something when visiting Joel using Firefox. **Scrollbars**. The
page wouldn't even fit on the screen! I started to read it, but my face
went numb before I needed to use the scrollbar.

OK for blogging -- not so cool for a book cover.

Of course, I'm a minimalist. I understand techy types want the details,
but I don't doubt the details will be no more than two clicks away.

Jim

 

[=?iso-8859-1?B?QW5kcuk=?=]

I have read enough "crass" criticisms that I felt I should add my voice
to this discussion...

I can't wait to see the new website go on "live". No offense to
anyone, but I think that the current website is extremely "amateurish"
and could serve as a deterrent to the promotion of Python [ok, this is
a slight exaggeration ;-)]. As for the proposed new website:

New (good looking) Python logo on the top left: great - conforms to
"standards" in terms of location
Search bar on the top right: same.
(same comments for help and sitemap)

Left navigation: (good location)
- Different links for different target audiences: great
- Various links including news, docs and downloads: great
.... (minor nitpick: I wouldn't include a separate link to Python-dev;
it should be reached via
community; simplest is best)

main display:
- idea of having "nice pictures": great
- Short description of what is Python: good... I would expand it a bit
(given the other comments below)
- News on front page: BAD! (possible exceptions - see below)
- Announcement on front page: BAD! (as above)
- Using Python for: good
- Written in Python: good ... although I would put it above "Using
Python for". I believe that "written in Python" is of a more general
nature than "Using Python for", and as such should appear first and be
seen more immediately by the less determined individual browsing the
site.

Regarding news and announcements... there's nothing that sends an
impression that nothing interesting is happening (Move along! Nothing
to see here...) than "news" that are a few weeks (months?) old. When
*important* News/Announcements would occur, I would include them
*above* the short description of what Python is good for (just below
the pictures) and only for a week or so - at which point they would be
removed from the front page and accessible by the link on the left. [I
have rarely seen a site when interesting news posted are changed on a
frequent basis...]

Of course, programmers won't care what the front page looks like (as
long as they easily can find a link to the download section). Pointed
haired bosses and journalists will... and they are probably the target
audience ;-)

André

 

[Roel Schroeven]

JW schreef:

Yes, and I read Playboy for the interviews

I don't read Playboy, but if I would I think it would not be for the
interviews. The pictures are what Playboy is about. Python is not about
pictures. It's not about interviews either. Both can have a place on the
site though, but it shouldn't be the first thing that draws the attention.

Agreed. The main page should be like a slick book cover. It should grab
you and leave you wanting more. I think the beta page does that pretty
well.


All you should have to do is open the book. Or click a link.

True, but I think the old site does a much better job of making clear
what links are available and what's available on those links than the
new one does.

In another post, you mention http://www.joelonsoftware.com/ which appears
to be some sort of blog (the current bane of the internet). I immediately
noticed something when visiting Joel using Firefox. **Scrollbars**. The
page wouldn't even fit on the screen! I started to read it, but my face
went numb before I needed to use the scrollbar.

Bad example -- my fault I guess. In case of Joel On Software, I was only
talking about the picture as an eye catcher.

OK for blogging -- not so cool for a book cover.

I guess you're right that scroll bars are to be avoided on the main page
of a website, though I don't think it's such a big deal.

Of course, I'm a minimalist. I understand techy types want the details,
but I don't doubt the details will be no more than two clicks away.

Probably, and I don't think they should be in plain sight all the time.
But it should be clear, from the very first moment, where they are. I
feel the new design doesn't do that. I know the links are there, but
somehow they look somewhat intimidating to me -- on first thought the
navigation menu looked like some administration menu, only to be used by
site administrators or perhaps advanced users. I guess it's the color
scheme or something, I don't know.

Also, while the details shouldn't necessarily be there, what should be
there is a short clear description of what the site and/or the subject
of the site is about. The new design has got it right in that aspect
with the What is Python section in more or less the most prominent place
on the page; I just mention it because many sites got it wrong IMO. Many
corporate sites, but also many open source project sites: many of them
show the News on their front page and have About as a link (and some
don't even have an About link). I can understand that regulars are more
interested in News than in About since they already know that, but in my
view the frontpage should be aimed for first-time users; others can
always bookmark the News page if that's what they're interested in.

 

[sszmidt]

Hmm, it's rather obvious that the first thing the eye should be attracted to
should be what the page is about. Something that represents the site.

Just like the first thing you see on a playboy mag is skin. The stories are
just added bonus.

By printing up different layout pages, and then flash them to someone and then
ask them what was the first thing they saw, and what does it mean to them,
you can find out what communicates what.

A web site that has others ads on them as the most noticeable thing on it, is
detracting from it's value.

 

[Roel Schroeven]

Roel Schroeven schreef:

JW schreef:

I
immediately
noticed something when visiting Joel using Firefox. **Scrollbars**. The
page wouldn't even fit on the screen! I started to read it, but my face
went numb before I needed to use the scrollbar.
[...]

OK for blogging -- not so cool for a book cover.

I guess you're right that scroll bars are to be avoided on the main page
of a website, though I don't think it's such a big deal.

To correct myself: I don't think there bad at all, if only the main
information is visible at first sight without scrolling. Take for
example http://www.rubyonrails.org/. I like that design, with a few caveats:
- the 'What's in the package' should be somewhat higher, in a more
prominent place on the page.
- the style of the text should be somewhat more humble.

Other than that, I like it. There's a short summary of what Ruby on
Rails is, the What's in the package section gives a more complete but
still concise explanation. Than some references, followed by an overview
of where the framework fits in the technical picture. Especially that
last section is something I sorely miss on many project pages, while it
is very important: I need to know if it fits in my existing
infrastructure, or if it's feasible to make it fit. In fact I would like
to see this section in front of the references section, but I guess this
order is better for less technical people.

It's also very clear where to get the software, tutorials and other
docs, and where I can find mailing lists, IRC channels etc.

In short, more or less everything I need to know right there on the
front page (admittedly with a bit of scrolling, but to me that's
absolutely not a big deal, even though my laptop doesn't have a scroll
wheel) or clearly linked from there.

(I'm not saying that Python should copy this design, just trying the
explain what I like and don't like in website front pages)

 

[Shalabh Chaturvedi]

Well apart from the front page and a couple of pages providing content
specific to different types of usersm the whole site is the same as it
was before. Do you have a problem with marketing python or with the
content of the python site? Could you expand on why you think the beta
site looks 'phony'?

The pictures are too big, too many and in your face (boastful, as
someone else mentioned). Even in most commercial product sites I see a
single company name/logo or a single quote in a corner somewhere. For
example www.ironport.com, www.informatica.com, www.basecamphq.com... One
great open source site is www.postgresql.org. Everything including
documentation has the same look and feel.

I'm looking at it as someone who is skeptical or knows only little about
Python. "What? Google, NASA!" (click, click.. nothing.. or a single
quote) "Bah! this is bogus". People want to know how something will help
them and why should they use it. It would be awesome if we can pull all
the pythonology success stories into python.org and link exactly one on
the main page (again see www.postgresql.org). Anything less than a case
study does not warrant a picture with a 'learn why..' on it.

These will link directly to success stories.

Good, but I think there should be only one with a smaller link to case
studies and/or quotes.

""Python has been an important part of Google since the beginning, and
remains so as the system grows and evolves. Today dozens of Google
engineers use Python, and we're looking for more people with skills in
this language." said Peter Norvig, director of search quality at Google,
Inc. "

thats what it says on the old site right at the top of the page...

So the google link on the home page should perhaps go to this quote
instead of google.com.

So you think we should add some copy that creates a more positive
impression of python? Thanks for your suggestion to rewrite the copy
regarding the team behind python. Could you come up with some
alternative for this?

Sure, I will work on this.

We have done... The feedback was that some pictures would help engage
people who view the website for the first time. This was especially true
of non-programmers who may be assessing python as part of a business
decition (who will probably not get further than the home page).

I think logos might be more effective. Again with links to success
stories with pull quotes highlighting Python's strengths. Pretty
pictures by themselves don't do much. People want to know how it is
different from other things, why it is better and *where* it is better.

Most developers tended to want to jump straight into bookmarked parts of
the site or just check the updated news. People wanting to learn about
python would try to find a 'for beginners' link (hence the prominence of
this).

These links are very important. A couple of nitpicks about presentation:
1. Why are there two 'documentation' sections on the left?
2. Why does the 'about' section show 3 sub-headings on the main page,
but grows to 6 when clicked?

A summary of questions whose answers may help us:

Do you have a problem with the way we are trying to 'market' python?

I like that you are trying to market Python. I think the way it is being
done may be ineffective, or worse, may backfire.

Which content in particular do you have an objection to?

The 3 edited (or stock?) pictures occupying majority of the real estate.
Missing success stories or case studies.

Could you expand on why you think the beta site looks 'phony'?

See top of email.

Could you tell me what about the site makes you think it looks 'cool' or
'flashy'?

The big pictures are too flashy. The colors and fonts etc. give make it
somewhat cool. Cool is a good thing. But not without content.

Could you come up with some alternative for the intro copy about python?

Sure. In fact I think the front page intro should be very minimal with 2 or
3 specifically targeted intros in the about section.

Is the current www.python.org written in HTML? If not where can I get
the source?

Cheers,
Shalabh

 

[Shalabh Chaturvedi]

That sounds fine.. I think having a link to a high profile user of
python would be very useful though. I agree the XP link is a bit shite.
Hopefully we'd get the photos and links to success
stories/events/software changing every now and again..

how about

1) High profile user of Python
2) Link to upcoming python event
3) Link to web development uses of python

the only problem is

1) people will argue over which user of python to put up
2) This will probably just be pycon and europython.. which is no bad
thing.. until we get more than two conferences at similar times.. which
one should we show?

If a text section is used instead, the little PIG meetings all over the
place could be a part of this?

btw do you have a problem with using nasa or astrazeneca as example high
profile users?

I think Astrazeneca would be great since they have a success story, but
NASA only has a couple of lines and I don't think is good enough.

Shalabh

 

[Shalabh Chaturvedi]

Tim the Taller (I presume he's taller; he's Dutch) and the other critics
fail to realize is that no one reads "content".

I disagree completely. I wouldn't touch a new language or technology
without first reading content. Neither would my boss, or any other
manager for that matter. This is not a watch, a garment, a toothpaste or
a burger. It is a software product, which needs a lot of content. Of
course it is hard to get the right amount of content that neither
overwhelms nor conveys the message.

I'm assured that in print ads the only "content" anyone reads is in
picture captions, and you damn well better make sure your message is
conveyed there. Any other "content" only wastes space. I see no reason to
think that a web page should be designed using any other assumption.

The few words in captions should indeed be conveying the message. Which
brings up a good question - what message does python.org want to convey?
Is beta.python.org doing that?

Cheers,
Shalabh

 

[Obaid R.]

Steve Holden:

The history of this choice is lost in the mists of time. Many other
proposals were made and discussed at around the same time, to the extent
that it became clear no one choice could win universal approval.

You are the first person to my knowledge to point out that it is shaped
like a cross. There is no significance in this shape.

Is there, I ask with some trepidation, a specific point to this question?

Thanks for the clarification.

I hope it is not counted against me that I am the first one to point
out that the logo is shaped like a cross. There might be many
explanations for this; but sooner or later a person with a different
background than the ones you knew would have likely noted the same.
With that said, however, none of this affects the point that the logo
is indeed shaped like I note. (Even the red cross of the International
Committee of the Red Cross is shaped like a plus sign:
http://www.icrc.org/).

And why ask with any trepidation, Steve? People of different
backgrounds have dissimilar sensitivities. I hope you agree that it
would be unfair to blame people for such deeply personal affairs. If
trepidation on the part of even the Red Cross was enough to cancel such
sensitivities, we would not have had a Red Crescent or a cooperation
between them. If not proving one's subscription to some set of beliefs,
such symbols at least disprove the same for others.

I do realize that I have no say in the decisions affecting Python's
current and future plans. But it makes sense to think that like any
other marketed product, Python must take into consideration the nature
of its target audience. And if it is to appeal to international users,
then points of deep contention are better avoided. Don't you agree? I
am glad the shape has no significance and I thank you for patience.

Regards