PDA

View Full Version : Web Etiquete?


Jim_Shady
10-07-2005, 09:55 AM
Hey all...

Something that I've been chatting about with one or two people at work and I'm interested in other peoples opinions:

1) 'Splash' pages are wrong wrong wrong. When I click on a website I expect to get to that website, not have to watch some stupid animation and then 'click here to enter' . It's annoying and not needed.

2) The first page of a website should fit on one screen. You should not have to scroll vertically, or even worse, horizontally, on the opening page of a site. If you've more info that will fit on the screen then it should be on two pages in my opinion. Once you are 'in' the site then a vertical scroll is fine (although I try not too), especially for things such as tutorials etc, but the front page should be one page only.

Example of where it's annoying and not needed! ('http://www.hsbc.co.uk/1/2/personal/internet-banking')

Discuss.....:D !

Shady.

PS: I realise that this depends on screen resolution - but sites should design for 1024 x 768 I think...

davidj
10-07-2005, 10:55 AM
1) 'Splash' pages are wrong wrong wrong. When I click on a website I expect to get to that website, not have to watch some stupid animation and then 'click here to enter' . It's annoying and not needed.

Ah yes.. Gone are the days when bling was beautiful. yet flash is still selling by the truck load.

I do believe there is a place for flash (or mackymedia would have dropped it along time ago) If its a product based site then a bit of flash cant hurt if its used well. Animation can draw you into the site just like a trailer for a movie may entice you to go to the cinema

check the link below and click the SLR Microsite

mercedes-benz SLR Micro Site ('http://www2.mercedes-benz.co.uk/content/unitedkingdom/mpc/mpc_unitedkingdom_website/en/home_mpc/passenger_cars/home/products/new_cars/slr.html')

2) The first page of a website should fit on one screen. You should not have to scroll vertically, or even worse, horizontally, on the opening page of a site. If you've more info that will fit on the screen then it should be on two pages in my opinion. Once you are 'in' the site then a vertical scroll is fine (although I try not too), especially for things such as tutorials etc, but the front page should be one page only.

well that depends on the users resolution. You have to design to the optimum res which for the last 10 years has always been 800x600. I do think developers are starting to dip their toe in the 1024x768 water but its still classed as bad practice.

new (high end) machines are being chucked out of factorys with wide screens and unusual resolutions. (sites developed at 800x??? on such machines look awful with loads of white horizontal space and loads of vertical scrolling)

Example of where it's annoying and not needed!

your example is probably a CMS and is being updated by an author not a developer/designer so the content is allowed to drop off the bottom. You are looking at these anoying issues through the eyes of a developer. The majority of web users are Oblivious to such distractions. I designed a site for a business a while ago. The director wanted an animated gif of a rotating envelope (email button) on his site coz he loved it!!!! It was like putting a doll-shaped toilet roll cover in the bathroom of a luxury appartment!!!! BUT he was the boss.

Jim_Shady
10-07-2005, 11:53 AM
check the link below and click the SLR Microsite

mercedes-benz SLR Micro Site ('http://www2.mercedes-benz.co.uk/content/unitedkingdom/mpc/mpc_unitedkingdom_website/en/home_mpc/passenger_cars/home/products/new_cars/slr.html')



Yeah... nice example... there's def a market for it and this is one... just think people use it too much. A guy advertising his skills as a plumber shouldn't have one for example..!

I do think developers are starting to dip their toe in the 1024x768 water but its still classed as bad practice.

I'm suprised. I would class the 1024x768 as the 'norm' now... but then I guess thats just the people that I know and doesn't really give me any perspective! CSS can obviously help with this issue...

The majority of web users are Oblivious to such distractions.

Don't think you give people enough credit here... I know that before I get into designing it used to annoy me... I guess it would other people also.

I designed a site for a business a while ago. The director wanted an animated gif of a rotating envelope (email button) on his site coz he loved it!!!!

You actually let the manager and boss have some input into the way that the site looked?! Are you crazy?! :lol:

domedia
10-07-2005, 04:11 PM
I'm suprised. I would class the 1024x768 as the 'norm' now... but then I guess thats just the people that I know and doesn't really give me any perspective!
Couple of things to remember:
1. If you by 'norm' mean majority that's fine. However, most developers would go for 'lowest common denominator' which would be 800x600.
2. Don't get too hung in screen resolutions. Poeple that do, often tend to take for granted that visitors browse with their browsers maximized in size. This is often not true, actually it's get's less and less true the higher the screen resolution is (only my claim, but it seelms pretty logical) :).

ranjan
10-07-2005, 04:51 PM
I would class the 1024x768 as the 'norm' now

What if i say 240x160 is the new norm? And what if I say 640x480 is making a come back?

Have you considered your PDA audience?

240x160 (palm)
320x240 (palm & windows mobile pre 2003v2)
640x480 (windows mobile 2003v2)

Screen resolution has nothing to do with browser viewport!!!!

What if I had a 1600x1200 resolution but my browser window is always set to 800 x 1000? Really, Its a fact - thats how I browse!

bkendall
10-07-2005, 05:13 PM
I agree, as desingers we should seperate our design from screen resolution. If I design a site properly it should look decent in all resolutions.