Trying Something Different

As designers of the new age, it’s difficult to bring something new to the plate, especially after so many generation of designers that have come before us. But we all sometimes try to bring a new taste to the table. I commend the initiative but think twice before going through with it.

Upon looking at webpages the main menu are ALWAYS located on either the left side of the page or across the top. This is simply the traditional way of doing this, unless the site is interactively designed in a way that the web surfer can play with it.

screenshot

While working in class we discussed our webpage designs with one another and some of the people had placed their menus on the right side of the page. Immediately I cocked an eyebrow and though “hey, that’s interesting”.
The motivation of the designer was to catch peoples’ eye by going against the grain and doing something different. I protested against the thought saying that trying to be creative/different is nice, but not at the cost of function. Another student countered my disapproval and said that it was a powerful luring tool, which would draw the viewers eye.

I looked through more wilder websites that would have more interactivity and complexity to them, and STILL the menu is either across the top of on the left side of the screen.

Screenshot of Newgrounds

I spoke with a teacher that taught me last year and brought this up with him, and what he told me was extremely fascinating. He said “Do you think that the student who did that in class was the first person to try that?!  There have been thousands of designers before them that tried it and gave up on it. You know why? BECAUSE IT DOESN’T WORK!” He explained about the technical aspects as the many, many issues come from putting, such as the menu not being visible on screen depending on the size of the screen, people don’t want to go hunting for main menus and other things as such.

Very interesting thought in my mind.

Website’s and Simplicity

Poking through various websites for a school project really got me thinking about their architecture. After reading through the audit I’ve come to learn some rather valid points about websites and their layouts, such as simplicity, knowing one’s location etc.

I’ve also come to realize how hard it is to botch up a website, unless the appearance and content does not honor the product or that which the site is about. Out of the 5 sites I peeked at I have come to conclude that the strongest site was Second Cup; ironically, I’ve been told the coffee company is also going bankrupt.
Some would say that the sites appearance is cliche, but you know what, from looking at the colour scheme and images, it simply SCREAMS “coffee”. Going through the site and seeing all their products would make anyone who was into coffee want to try some of the stuff. Heck, I don’t drink coffee and I wanted to try tasting some of them.

Second Cup screenshot

On the other hand Starbucks, the most successful coffee company that I know of, had the weakest site in my opinion. You don’t even see coffee on the home page, in fact the logo itself is only seen tucked away in the upper corner. It had all this advertising for charity about it. I actually had to go hunting for the product in the site. It did have everything, information of the company, news, you can even order coffee.

Starbucks screenshot

I asked my instructor about the Starbucks site and he simply told me their methods. They’re already the biggest fish in the pond, they already know people are eating our of the palm of their hand. Now they simply have to make them look less monopolizing with all these charity videos and what not on their site. Really clever…