Old 31-10-2006, 05:06   #1 (permalink)
bender
I'd hit it
 
bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 369
New mtv.com

A brilliant site, once again. What can I say?

www.mtv.com
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 05:12   #2 (permalink)
Mr Fred
Magazines™
 
Mr Fred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Glasgow..
Posts: 11,427
well for starters i wouldn't say brilliant - its too crowded / black.
useless for uk market as you cant play videos.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 05:17   #3 (permalink)
Alexanda
European Champions 2008
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 2,387
dont bother
__________________
whats facebook?
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 06:54   #4 (permalink)
cam
vague™
 
cam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 5,486
horrible.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 07:36   #5 (permalink)
Mr Fred
Magazines™
 
Mr Fred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Glasgow..
Posts: 11,427
what we need is a really good music site focused on uk market with a brilliant design.
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 07:37   #6 (permalink)
cam
vague™
 
cam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 5,486
haha.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 09:18   #7 (permalink)
dorian
i do lines
 
dorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Poland/Denmark
Posts: 3,227
back to 2001
__________________
...
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 10:38   #8 (permalink)
bender
I'd hit it
 
bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 369
Interesting. Is it somehow different when you view the site in the UK?
I'm especially intrigued by the 2001 comment. Care to ellaborate?
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 16:06   #9 (permalink)
stylin328
Senior Member
 
stylin328's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 332
Send a message via AIM to stylin328
its actually just the overdrive design. they just took the overdrive design and put it to everypage now, I like it, whatever
  Reply With Quote
Old 31-10-2006, 17:59   #10 (permalink)
dorian
i do lines
 
dorian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Poland/Denmark
Posts: 3,227
Quote:
I'm especially intrigued by the 2001 comment
I was not comparing it to anything particular. Style wise it kinda looks dated... it's that pseudo-slick interface.... seem to remember it was in fashion back then.
The only thing (imo) that has a "contemporary" look is the huge search field. (which I like btw)
__________________
...
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2006, 03:28   #11 (permalink)
bender
I'd hit it
 
bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 369
I happen to quite like the fact that it's very web 3.0.
Especially the video mode.
Gigantic streaming video is the backbone there. It couldn't have been done well just a few years back. These days people have 8-24mb connections so it's possible.
And the fact that it feels like a computer program. Not a website.
And the form is just ingenious, I had been struggling with getting a 300x250 ad block fitted on each page on a site I'm working on. Problem solved.
It's ingenious in many simple ways. I certainly can't fault them for managing to fit all that content into a single 1024x768 screen; everything is above the fold. No scrolling, ever.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2006, 04:16   #12 (permalink)
cam
vague™
 
cam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 5,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by bender
I happen to quite like the fact that it's very web 3.0.

Oh do fuck off.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2006, 04:23   #13 (permalink)
Mr Fred
Magazines™
 
Mr Fred's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Glasgow..
Posts: 11,427
haha,

bender - did you have a hand in its production?
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2006, 04:49   #14 (permalink)
lukasarts
Shiv.
 
lukasarts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Elsewhere
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
I happen to quite like the fact that it's very web 3.0.

People have enough trouble with what 2.0 is. One pointless buzzword at a time please.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2006, 06:48   #15 (permalink)
Stickman
Dr. Lucien Sanchez
 
Stickman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 5,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by bender
I certainly can't fault them for managing to fit all that content into a single 1024x768 screen; everything is above the fold. No scrolling, ever.
Unless you use the scrollbar on the right.
Why's fitting it into a fixed box a good thing anyway? That's why it looks crowded.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2006, 08:27   #16 (permalink)
bender
I'd hit it
 
bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 369
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickman
Why's fitting it into a fixed box a good thing anyway? That's why it looks crowded.
It isn't necessarily on the types of pages you normally design. It might be a bad choice there.
But people rarely bother to scroll down on the front page. I don't. I just want to navigate to whatever it is I'm looking for.
But in this case I might see an article about My Chemical Romance and click on it. Cha-ching! Now I wouldn't have noticed that article had it been buried 900px down the screen.
The beauty is in how subtle the ads are, even though you have two large ad formats and all that content crammed above the fold.
You might not like it but it's effective.


Very web 3.5
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2006, 09:05   #17 (permalink)
Scott
sanddancer
 
Scott's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: South Shields
Posts: 2,920
Send a message via MSN to Scott
do one
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2006, 09:08   #18 (permalink)
bender
I'd hit it
 
bender's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 369
One what?
  Reply With Quote
Reply



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Contact Us - Web Design Forums - Archive - Top
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8