Comments on: 9rules Homepage: Scrivs’ Critique

By: Codes

Codes — Sat, 25 Feb 2006 18:09:19 +0000

I really like both of them. Personally, I love these styles of designs. The colors are very light and it is very eye friendly. The contrasts also helps to wake up from the light colors. Great design!

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 17 Feb 2006 02:53:51 +0000

While I donâ€™t have much opinion regarding the designs, I think â€because we needed the new featuresâ€ is probably the worst reason to launch a re-design Iâ€™ve ever heard. Iâ€™m as guilty as anyone for making sacrifices for a project on a deadline, but when it comes to your very own portal, the only site that matters for your company, I canâ€™t think of any reason in the world to launch a design that you werenâ€™t absolutely in love with.

Maybe Iâ€™m naÃ¯ve.

By: Joe Clay

Joe Clay — Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:40:47 +0000

It’s probably already been said but the old version actually directed your eye to certain places. This one gives weight to nothing, and just appears cluttered. I’m sorry to say but if I had stumbled upon it randomly, this would be a quick click of the back button. As someone already said, it looks like a portal page for an unregistered domain. This is the worst iteration of the 9rules homepage, and I don’t think it’s “worst but beautiful.” I just think it’s worst and appears too complicated. If you put it up because you think it’s easily navigable, I think you’re wrong. I only looked for the sections you mentioned, otherwise I wouldn’t have even noticed them. There’s not enough visual weight here. Sorry, I really dislike this iteration. I LOVED the old one.

By: pepe

pepe — Thu, 09 Feb 2006 14:49:40 +0000

dude…where is the whitespace? bigger, go bigger! can’t cope with all that information.

By: Jamie Neely

Jamie Neely — Sun, 05 Feb 2006 20:14:35 +0000

If you are really considering an iterative approach to getting this design right – I think it makes more sense to put the most visually appealing design into use (design 1) and then let the information architecture fall out from user’s comments over time.

visual immediacy is very important. Usability has a slightly longer (although no-less important) curve. But it is the visual impact that maybe carries more weight when you are trying to create and maintain a relationship with your users.

The new homepage lacks the type of personality that your users are now accustomed to. I feel that this is leaving your design open to negative criticism (or grumbling) which is not necassarely as useful as having positive criticism with an emphasis on improvement. Just my 2-pence-worth!

By: Noel Hurtley

Noel Hurtley — Sun, 05 Feb 2006 06:13:16 +0000

My biggest gripe with the new version is the way the information is laid out.

I feel that there is simply too much information for most users to process quickly which will ultimately lead the user to become frusterated.

By: James AkaXakA

James AkaXakA — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 22:40:44 +0000

It’s even worse, information design wise.

By: Christian Montoya

Christian Montoya — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 06:47:35 +0000

You are on target here. The new look is washed out. I also think the 760 fixed width look is not very conducive to the amount of content you are serving. You probably already know what I’m going to say, but a semi liquid layout that maxes at around 1000 pixels might work better.

By: WD Milner

WD Milner — Sat, 04 Feb 2006 00:42:48 +0000

I prefer the old design as well. It has a warmth and personality that is totally lacking in the cold, pale, commercial look and feel of the new design that basically reminds me of just another search portal crammed with dubious links there only to justify showing me advertisements.

By: Keith

Keith — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 16:55:33 +0000

I didn’t read all the comments, so if this has been said, sorry…

I’m not going to say much about the aesthetic, except that I prefer the old version. What I do think you might want to look at is the Information Design, IA and/or layout of the current page. It’s kind of a mess. It doesn’t seem to have any hierarchy at all, well, except my eyes are drawn straight to the ads, which may be intentional.

Seriously, what is supposed to be the most important element on this page? I can’t tell. Maybe it’s done by design? If so it might not be working as intended. It could be the fact that there are about 7 different treatments for content areas, that while seem some what related, don’t fit all that well together. There is just too much going on.

I think the “theme” and “idea” is ok, but the execution comes of pretty messy — probably because it’s grown organically, etc. A common problem. Next time you redesign have a solid IA/Info design phase where you really look at the content and where it’s placed. You may consider cutting something (as a focus group of one I can say the random entries aren’t that useful) and look to the readers to help with that.

My .02.