On 10/4/10 18:54 CDT, Walter Bright wrote:
Brian Hay wrote:
With all due respect to Walter, as a professional web designer I have
to agree with Andrei. It's terrible for all the reasons mentioned ...
and more. "1995 programmer art" sums it up.
Ok, but on the other hand, mint.com gets high fives for its home page.
But I find it to be slow loading, the green-on-green text (near the
bottom) impossible to read, and the animated text slideshows irritating.
Or maybe I'm just too old :-)
I think you and I (as many programmers who aren't web designers) are in
the "don't/don't" place (we don't know what we don't know). Getting from
there to "do/don't" -> "do/do" -> "don't/do" is a long, arduous process.
So we're essentially unable to predict accurately the likeability of a
web page by only looking at it, and clearly we're not in the position of
designing a good website.
Having gladly acknowledged your interest in this topic (as I agree
marketing is at this point essential), my overarching advice is:
1. Find a good professional.
2. Explain in broadest terms _what_ you are trying to achieve at the
highest level (NOT "here's _how_ I want this to be, tweak it"). For
example, instead of saying "I want three equally sized columns because
nobody told me that that design is cr(ee|ap)py, and please color them
like pee in a swimming pool while you're at it", tell them "I have three
product lines, and I want them featured on the homepage in a simple and
straightforward manner".
3. Let the (wo)man do h(is|er) job.
4. Pay h(im|er) a small fraction of the money you'd be losing in
opportunity costs should you do all the work yourself starting from
"don't/don't".
5. ...
6. Profit!
Andrei
