Wednesday, December 12, 2007
Monday, November 26, 2007
Blog Topic #8 : Sapient vs. Oslaw
After looking through all the listed sites for possible review and analysis, I decided to look at sapient.com and oslaw.com.
SAPIENT
In the most basic sense, sapient helps there clients, "innovate in the areas of marketing, business, operations and technology." Their goal is to, "to partner with companies in a spirit of collaboration to help them evolve and grow in today’s dynamic marketplace."
Sapient.com is a very cool and stylish looking website. They have a monochromatic orange based color scheme which I think is very "hip". I think the look and feel is effective because it comes off as being very professional, but still playful at the same time. The navigation is the coolest part, in my opinion. The home page starts with the navigation of the right side, and when you roll over it, the entire original 5 links expand into an array of different options to click on. This really helps the user get to exactly where they want to go quickly, without having to search around the site.
I played around a little with the sites features and hypothetically what I would be doing if I was actually interested in there services. Overall it seemed pretty easy. The site does have ALOT of information though, and its a good thing that it is structured so well.
Immediatly when you visit this site it is obvious that it uses flash, as well as HTML and javascript. It probably uses some kind of server technology as well for its clients in a database. What it is I'm not sure.
Right now I'm sitting at a 19" wide screen monitor, and I can view the site perfectly with huge margins. If I bring the open window from my extended desktop to my laptop I can still see everything I saw before (15.4" monitor on laptop)
This site is probably not super unique. It has nothing that has not been done before, but in general, what they've done has been done well.
Overall, I would give the site a 8/10. Sometimes the navigation can be a bit funky and will trick you by moving to the top instead of the right side. Generally this is fine, but for an old grandma (who probably wouldn't be using this site anyway) it might cause some confusion.
OSLAW
As soon as I opened this site I did not like it. It does not look professional and does not look well designed.
This line pretty much sums up what oslaw does, "Our philosophy is that we do best what we know best - litigation and trial work." Basically they are lawyers.
The main communication objective of this site is to tell about oslaws services. They have sections for what they do, who they are, getting it done, and results.
The site itself it a bit of a mess. There is no real title... Well there is, but its at the bottom of the page, stupid. At the top of the page is a thin purple area for the main nav. and the pages main content section is in a giant unstructured white area in the middle of the page without margins. Or at least you can't see the margins. At the bottom of the page is the title and name of the company, as well as contact information.
As far as navigation and getting around on the site, it does pretty well. The navigation is pretty straight-forward, with the main nav. at the top of the page horizontally, and secondary nav. on each of the main navs pages. The main nav. is set up so that the button remains highlighted when you are on the corresponding page. This can be nice sometimes, but its not quite working here. There just isn't enough to let us know what page we are on. The secondary nav. is OK. The text is very small, probably 7pt, and is even smaller than the content text, which seems silly to me. I didn't even notice this until just now, there is more "main" navigation on the bottom section of the page next to the title.
The site really doesn't have a definable look and feel. It's very boring, very little graphical content, plain text. Blah. I really don't think the design of this site was really thought out. It really feels like it was just thrown together in an afternoon.
I feel pretty confident that I could easily get in contact with a rep. from the company if I wanted to. The site certainly needs work, but its not hard to navigate.
From what I can see the site just uses basic HTML and some javascript/css.
Overall, the site needs work. 6/10.
SAPIENT
In the most basic sense, sapient helps there clients, "innovate in the areas of marketing, business, operations and technology." Their goal is to, "to partner with companies in a spirit of collaboration to help them evolve and grow in today’s dynamic marketplace."
Sapient.com is a very cool and stylish looking website. They have a monochromatic orange based color scheme which I think is very "hip". I think the look and feel is effective because it comes off as being very professional, but still playful at the same time. The navigation is the coolest part, in my opinion. The home page starts with the navigation of the right side, and when you roll over it, the entire original 5 links expand into an array of different options to click on. This really helps the user get to exactly where they want to go quickly, without having to search around the site.
I played around a little with the sites features and hypothetically what I would be doing if I was actually interested in there services. Overall it seemed pretty easy. The site does have ALOT of information though, and its a good thing that it is structured so well.
Immediatly when you visit this site it is obvious that it uses flash, as well as HTML and javascript. It probably uses some kind of server technology as well for its clients in a database. What it is I'm not sure.
Right now I'm sitting at a 19" wide screen monitor, and I can view the site perfectly with huge margins. If I bring the open window from my extended desktop to my laptop I can still see everything I saw before (15.4" monitor on laptop)
This site is probably not super unique. It has nothing that has not been done before, but in general, what they've done has been done well.
Overall, I would give the site a 8/10. Sometimes the navigation can be a bit funky and will trick you by moving to the top instead of the right side. Generally this is fine, but for an old grandma (who probably wouldn't be using this site anyway) it might cause some confusion.
OSLAW
As soon as I opened this site I did not like it. It does not look professional and does not look well designed.
This line pretty much sums up what oslaw does, "Our philosophy is that we do best what we know best - litigation and trial work." Basically they are lawyers.
The main communication objective of this site is to tell about oslaws services. They have sections for what they do, who they are, getting it done, and results.
The site itself it a bit of a mess. There is no real title... Well there is, but its at the bottom of the page, stupid. At the top of the page is a thin purple area for the main nav. and the pages main content section is in a giant unstructured white area in the middle of the page without margins. Or at least you can't see the margins. At the bottom of the page is the title and name of the company, as well as contact information.
As far as navigation and getting around on the site, it does pretty well. The navigation is pretty straight-forward, with the main nav. at the top of the page horizontally, and secondary nav. on each of the main navs pages. The main nav. is set up so that the button remains highlighted when you are on the corresponding page. This can be nice sometimes, but its not quite working here. There just isn't enough to let us know what page we are on. The secondary nav. is OK. The text is very small, probably 7pt, and is even smaller than the content text, which seems silly to me. I didn't even notice this until just now, there is more "main" navigation on the bottom section of the page next to the title.
The site really doesn't have a definable look and feel. It's very boring, very little graphical content, plain text. Blah. I really don't think the design of this site was really thought out. It really feels like it was just thrown together in an afternoon.
I feel pretty confident that I could easily get in contact with a rep. from the company if I wanted to. The site certainly needs work, but its not hard to navigate.
From what I can see the site just uses basic HTML and some javascript/css.
Overall, the site needs work. 6/10.
Saturday, November 24, 2007
Blog Topic #2 : planetphotoshop.com
Planetphotoshop.com yet another tutorial based site. This one I really like though. Photoshop is the kind of program where no matter how versed you are in it, there will always be something new and cool to learn. This site has many of the newest and coolest techniques.
The site is designed well and its generally pretty easy to find what you're looking for. It has a video tutorial section with lots and lots of tutorials, and it has a section for regular tutorials. It also has a great forum and review section.
The site is designed well and its generally pretty easy to find what you're looking for. It has a video tutorial section with lots and lots of tutorials, and it has a section for regular tutorials. It also has a great forum and review section.
Blog Topic #2: Steve's Tutes
Steve's Tutes (http://www.video-animation.com/) is a site where a guy named Steve creates and links out to numerous video tutorials. Most of the tutorials are for the various versions of Flash, but there are also HTML, Photoshop, Java, and general video capture tutorials.
Some of the tutorials are good, some bad, some excellent, and some terrible. So It's a bit of a gamble when choosing one. I personally LOVE video tutorials because it is the next best thing to being in an actual class room. You can actually watch in real time what the person is doing, and how they are doing it. Often, the tutorials will come with a sample file as well so you can decontruct the process if you wish.
The site itself is pretty bad. It's basically just a linking site, with about half original content. It would help if it was a bit better designed though.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Blog Topic #7 : What's a favicon???
A favicon is is that little icon you will often see next to a websites URL which is basically just another way to identify the site. Favicon's are also known as website icon, page icon, or urlicon and is short for "favorites icon". Today, favicons are used by almost all large scale and high traffic websites, and even the majority of smaller sites (so long as the designer knows what they are doing). Besides being displayed next to the URL in the address bar, favicons can also be seen on bookmark lists, and in tabbed document interfaces.
Here are a few examples of some familiar favicons:
Youtube, Google, and Myspace. All pretty recognizable icons that immediately identify the site.
Favicons are uploaded to your website by using a file called "favicon.ico". Before you create your favicon you have to download a photoshop plugin which supports the .ico file format. To create your favicon, use photoshop while keeping in mind a few things. First off, a favicon is only 16x16 pixels, which means there is a good chance that your standard logo may not look good at that size (if its even square). Apparently the best way to go about creating your favicon is to use a 64x64 px canvas size and resize the image to 16x16 when finished. Also, when you resize your image use the "Bicubic Sharper" setting, which caused the image to blur less when resizing.
Every site can benefit from a favicon. Some people can remember a image or graphic far easier than a URL and when they see the sites favicon, they know what site it is without reading the address. Why not have one? They are fairly easy to create (a real memorable good one may be more difficult) and upload to your site, and they make your site seem more professional.
Here are a few examples of some familiar favicons:
Youtube, Google, and Myspace. All pretty recognizable icons that immediately identify the site.
Favicons are uploaded to your website by using a file called "favicon.ico". Before you create your favicon you have to download a photoshop plugin which supports the .ico file format. To create your favicon, use photoshop while keeping in mind a few things. First off, a favicon is only 16x16 pixels, which means there is a good chance that your standard logo may not look good at that size (if its even square). Apparently the best way to go about creating your favicon is to use a 64x64 px canvas size and resize the image to 16x16 when finished. Also, when you resize your image use the "Bicubic Sharper" setting, which caused the image to blur less when resizing.
Every site can benefit from a favicon. Some people can remember a image or graphic far easier than a URL and when they see the sites favicon, they know what site it is without reading the address. Why not have one? They are fairly easy to create (a real memorable good one may be more difficult) and upload to your site, and they make your site seem more professional.
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Blog Topic # 6 : Experience Design
Experience design, also sometimes known as experimental design is, "The practice of designing products, processes, services, events, and environments -- each of which is a human experience -- based on the consideration of an individual's or group's needs, desires, beliefs, knowledge, skills, experiences, and perceptions." Basically, its an approach to creating a enjoyable and productive experience for people in a certain medium, in this case, web or multimedia interface design. (Nathan Shedroff)
When considering a websites design, most designers will consider the sites usability and/or the users "experience" while visiting the site. Some will make a site which is highly intuitive and strictly for usability purposes. Most e-commerce sites are built this way. A site which uses the idea of experience design is something far more interactive and interesting to browse through than a site focusing on usability. Personally, I like sites which are about halfway between, something that creates an awesome experience for the user, but at the same time is easy to navigate and is usable.
Here is a site that I absolutely love. My goal is to be able to do something this awesome someday (even though I'm sure this site had about 15 people working on it.)
http://2advanced.com/
This site is seriously so cool. Completely build with flash, it sort of simulates its own stand alone computer touch screen interface. I imagine walking through a spaceship and finding this interface on a random wall somewhere. The point is, I don't have any trouble navigating this site, but at the same time I actually find it enjoyable to do so.
To conclude, I think the most successful sites are the ones which can successfully mix a great unique user experience with intuitive and simple usability.
When considering a websites design, most designers will consider the sites usability and/or the users "experience" while visiting the site. Some will make a site which is highly intuitive and strictly for usability purposes. Most e-commerce sites are built this way. A site which uses the idea of experience design is something far more interactive and interesting to browse through than a site focusing on usability. Personally, I like sites which are about halfway between, something that creates an awesome experience for the user, but at the same time is easy to navigate and is usable.
Here is a site that I absolutely love. My goal is to be able to do something this awesome someday (even though I'm sure this site had about 15 people working on it.)
http://2advanced.com/
This site is seriously so cool. Completely build with flash, it sort of simulates its own stand alone computer touch screen interface. I imagine walking through a spaceship and finding this interface on a random wall somewhere. The point is, I don't have any trouble navigating this site, but at the same time I actually find it enjoyable to do so.
To conclude, I think the most successful sites are the ones which can successfully mix a great unique user experience with intuitive and simple usability.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Blog Topic #3 : What is RSS?
To fully understand RSS, it's important to first understand syndication, or at least web syndication. Essentially, web syndication means that one site will make certain information available to a user, usually using a web feed, which is used to serve users frequently updated content. This content can include forums, news, etc. Confused?
RSS is a web feed format, which is often used for blog and podcast updates. RSS Stands for Really Simple Syndication or Rich Site Summary. A RSS document is called a "feed", "web feed" or "channel". The main function of RSS, as briefly explained above, is for people to be able to view content that is updated often, and that may be of personal interest to them, without having to manually access the page the information originated from. Automation is the key word with RSS.
An aggregator is generally a web application, which brings all of the information together that you want in your RSS feed. This way you can have info from many different sites all on your own personal site. Aggregators "pull" content instead of "push", Email pushes content. Also, once your RSS feed is written, the aggregators act automatically, meaning you don't have to do anything to receive your info.
RSS can be used to track other students blogs because anytime a student posts a new blog, and aggregator will notice and bring you the new information. (The Dashboard options are pretty limited for this, so I think you need to install a aggregator program to do it for you.) This information will be posted on your site in whichever format you have set up. Karl has his personal website set up for this. I think this is the code:
I haven't gotten around to going to bloglines.com yet to create my own feed, but I'll be doing that soon.
RSS is a web feed format, which is often used for blog and podcast updates. RSS Stands for Really Simple Syndication or Rich Site Summary. A RSS document is called a "feed", "web feed" or "channel". The main function of RSS, as briefly explained above, is for people to be able to view content that is updated often, and that may be of personal interest to them, without having to manually access the page the information originated from. Automation is the key word with RSS.
An aggregator is generally a web application, which brings all of the information together that you want in your RSS feed. This way you can have info from many different sites all on your own personal site. Aggregators "pull" content instead of "push", Email pushes content. Also, once your RSS feed is written, the aggregators act automatically, meaning you don't have to do anything to receive your info.
RSS can be used to track other students blogs because anytime a student posts a new blog, and aggregator will notice and bring you the new information. (The Dashboard options are pretty limited for this, so I think you need to install a aggregator program to do it for you.) This information will be posted on your site in whichever format you have set up. Karl has his personal website set up for this. I think this is the code:
I haven't gotten around to going to bloglines.com yet to create my own feed, but I'll be doing that soon.
Blog Topic #2 : tutvid.com
O.K. I absolutely love this site. Tutvid.com is a website dedicated to creating narrated video tutorials for many Adobe products including; Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Golive, Fireworks, Flash, Illustrator, and Bridge. The way it's set up is that you select the program you want to view a tutorial from, select the specific tutorial, and then a link will take you to youtube.com where you can watch the video for free and with quick load times.
Unfortunately, the site is lacking in the Dreamweaver section with only four tutorials. Although tutorials such as, 'make basic rollover buttons' and 'basic page creation' are very helpful and thorough. Other programs such as Flash, and Photoshop, have a wide selection of tutorials ranging in difficulty from beginner to intermediate.
The narrator of the videos is very clear and concise in his explanations, and doesn't overwhelm the viewer with information. With that being said, the videos are still substantial, occasionally lasting nearly 30 minutes.
For me the best way to learn is visually. Actually seeing someone demonstrate how to do something, hands on, is by far the most effective way to learn. When watching these tutorials, I tend to follow along, pressing pause now and then to catch up with the narrator.
The only downside I can think of is that the videos do not have great resolution, and users who are not somewhat familiar with the programs interface may get lost since the icons are all nearly impossible to read. This hasn't been a huge issue for me, only a minor annoyance.
I urge you to check out tutvid.com. It's a truly great resource that I'm sure will start to cost money as soon as more people find out about it.
Here is an example of one of the tutorials. This one is, 'basic page creation' using Dreamweaver. Enjoy!
Unfortunately, the site is lacking in the Dreamweaver section with only four tutorials. Although tutorials such as, 'make basic rollover buttons' and 'basic page creation' are very helpful and thorough. Other programs such as Flash, and Photoshop, have a wide selection of tutorials ranging in difficulty from beginner to intermediate.
The narrator of the videos is very clear and concise in his explanations, and doesn't overwhelm the viewer with information. With that being said, the videos are still substantial, occasionally lasting nearly 30 minutes.
For me the best way to learn is visually. Actually seeing someone demonstrate how to do something, hands on, is by far the most effective way to learn. When watching these tutorials, I tend to follow along, pressing pause now and then to catch up with the narrator.
The only downside I can think of is that the videos do not have great resolution, and users who are not somewhat familiar with the programs interface may get lost since the icons are all nearly impossible to read. This hasn't been a huge issue for me, only a minor annoyance.
I urge you to check out tutvid.com. It's a truly great resource that I'm sure will start to cost money as soon as more people find out about it.
Here is an example of one of the tutorials. This one is, 'basic page creation' using Dreamweaver. Enjoy!
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Blog Topic #1 : simplesquare.com
I came across simplesquare.com (a web design and development company that also does some video work) while browsing on standoutawards.com. Needless to say, it really stood out. The entire site is done using Flash, and its fairly obvious once you start navigating. The navigation is from left to right in a horizontal orientation. For example, in the first set of links, "portfolio" is one of the options. Click on it and many of the names of the projects Simplesquare has worked on lists themselves to the right of the portfolio bar, and in a downwards succession. Click on one of the projects and a box pops up, once again to the right, telling about that particular project. The best part is the way the navigation appears and presents itself... its hard to describe, but thats what the above link is for. Also, all of the projects are color coded telling whether its a design and development, motion, or design project. The site is complete with interactive sound upon mouse over and up/down. Its done tastefully and is not an annoyance. There is also ambient futuristic background music which loops and can be turned off or on.
I like this site because it looks very flashy (no pun intended), but has incredibly intuitive and simple navigation. Too often I find web designers sites which focus more on incredible visuals and crazy new navigation ideas, which most of the time don't work so well. Here's an example: 0-style.com. Obviously the designer(s) spent a good amount of time creating this site, but its navigation in my opinion is ridiculous and jumbled. It took me a good minute to really figure out how it all worked, and by web usability standards, thats pretty bad.
As far as I know Simplesquare.com has no brand new ideas. There are sites out there that have far more impressive Flash incorporated into there sites. But I think Simplesquare stands out because of how well they structured there site and made it very usable, but at the same time nice to look at.
In conclusion, Simplesquare is an awesome site because:
A. It has great navigation, which is easy to understand and use.
B. Considering the amount of Flash involved, it has a relatively quick load time... No hiccups.
and
C. It looks great. Its clean, has good use of color, solid graphics, etc.
I like this site because it looks very flashy (no pun intended), but has incredibly intuitive and simple navigation. Too often I find web designers sites which focus more on incredible visuals and crazy new navigation ideas, which most of the time don't work so well. Here's an example: 0-style.com. Obviously the designer(s) spent a good amount of time creating this site, but its navigation in my opinion is ridiculous and jumbled. It took me a good minute to really figure out how it all worked, and by web usability standards, thats pretty bad.
As far as I know Simplesquare.com has no brand new ideas. There are sites out there that have far more impressive Flash incorporated into there sites. But I think Simplesquare stands out because of how well they structured there site and made it very usable, but at the same time nice to look at.
In conclusion, Simplesquare is an awesome site because:
A. It has great navigation, which is easy to understand and use.
B. Considering the amount of Flash involved, it has a relatively quick load time... No hiccups.
and
C. It looks great. Its clean, has good use of color, solid graphics, etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)