Web Design Forums

hiteshmehta · 29-06-2007, 14:24

I wanted to share this link with you all since this blog post was the first reaction on may 15th after Jakob Nielsen spoke about web2.0 distracts good design.

Read/Write Web also linked this blog post and you can check out the multiple reactions at:

I totally disagree with Jakob Nielsen on Web2.0 'Distracts Good Design'

cjgraphix · 29-06-2007, 18:19

He's right though. So many designers/developers are so focused on the user interactivity of web2.0, that the content (which is king) gets pushed aside or removed altogether. This idea that web2.0 is a design style ends up hurting more than it helps too.

Now, I don't think web2.0 is all that bad. But I see what he's saying. There will be backlash from 2.0, and 3.0... we'll just have to wait and see what, or how costly, the backlash is. Remember, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Snowshiro · 29-06-2007, 23:17

I wrote some rant about Nielsen somewhere else in this forum.

One visit to his personal website (his idea of how design should be) is enough to make you want to slit your wrists from the boring banality of it.

As I said previously Nielsen is as much of a design Nazi as the wanky art-for-arts sake brigade. He's just at the other extreme. If real life mirrored his ideas, we'd all have L and R tattooed on our hands and feet to help us remember which was which.

Haris · 03-07-2007, 04:51

Well, who is Jakob Nielson? I totally disagree with him. He doesn't know what web2.0 means. Web 2.0 is all about content and features and less design that's why minimal designs are used on web 2.0 sites.

D856C · 06-07-2007, 13:01

I don't think it's only about minimal design, but about the bandwagon effect. To many people are wanting to go web 2.0 in the worst possible way -- and succeeding famously.

BTW, Jabob Nielsen: Web 2.0 'neglecting good design' is the other thread about this.

Most people won't do a usability test with real humans (social). Rather they will dub their construction Web 2.0 and assume social factors not in evidence (antisocial).

Web 2.0 can be good for usability or bad. The proof isn't Jacob's seal of approval -- it's testing. (With humans ...in case that wasn't clear).

Usability for Rich Internet Applications may be the first and only article people who have read dozens of ruby and AJAX tutorials ever read. Hint: If you don't read about it -- or apply the principles -- don't assume it automagically happens.

Usability 2.0? is a look at what usability should be for Web 2.0 apps. Again, if you assume usability is baked into Web 2.0 by default, you need to rethink your assumptions.

stupid dog · 10-08-2007, 14:18

If Jacob had it way, every hyperlink would still be blue underlined!

While he has some useful insights, I still wonder if he just never understood the difference between mainframe app designs and the designing for the 'real' interent

D856C · 12-08-2007, 20:14

I'm sure the Scrolovers site would change Jacob's mind with the 'real' internet - which is really about what you can do with hyperlinks when you have too much time on your hands.

Bill Posters · 13-08-2007, 04:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by D856C

I'm sure the Scrollovers site would change Jacob's mind with the 'real' internet - which is really about what you can do with hyperlinks when you have too much time on your hands.

I thought it was pretty nifty when I first saw that a while back… until I saw the code that it produces…

Turns this…

Code:

<a href="http://example.com" class="scrollover" type="scrollover">Link text</a>

…into this…

Code:

<a style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://example.com" class="bannerScrollover" type="scrollover"><fieldset style="border: medium none ; margin: 0pt; padding: 0pt; line-height: 1em; text-align: left; display: inline;"><span style="overflow: visible; display: block; cursor: pointer; height: 1em; position: relative; width: 76px; margin-top: -0.2em;"><span style="overflow: hidden; display: block; position: absolute; height: 1.3em; width: 76px; margin-bottom: -0.3em;"><span style="display: block; margin-top: -0.1em; position: absolute; width: 76px;" class="scrollover_Nudge"><em id="scrollover_0" style="display: block; line-height: 1.4em; position: absolute; top: -28px; font-style: normal;">link text link text</em></span></span></span></fieldset></a>

…x however many times you use it on a page.

+ the js file

It's products like this which give creativity a bad name in web development.

Nice idea, but really badly produced.
Pass.

Do Gooder · 13-08-2007, 04:17

i have read a bit of Jacob's stuff. He really helped me understand usability and i have allot of respect for him... thoroughly recommend reading his stuff - a bit boring, though it is.

agreed he does go a bit too far at times - his own website is a testament to that.

forbes · 13-08-2007, 07:51

neilson is fat and bald and needs to shut the hell up!

i hate how people like him think they can dictate how websites should look like. i agree websites have to be usable for everyone, but design wise i dont really think he's in a position to judge unless he's a well-known prolific designer which he's not...

also i agree with the bandwagon effect with web 2.0, nothing is original anymore...

Do Gooder · 13-08-2007, 08:35

hehe. his looks match is web design skills.

but as a usability chap - i feel the man knows his stuff.

funkyprem · 13-08-2007, 09:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Do Gooder

but as a usability chap - i feel the man knows his stuff.

wrong. as a usability guru he most certainly has the figures to justify pretty much any view that he cares to put across, but the thing is he has no knowledge how these figures he has relate to anything we do in the real world.

he knows the what's of usability, but doesn't know the why's.

Do Gooder · 13-08-2007, 10:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by funkyprem

he knows the what's of usability, but doesn't know the why's.

can see your point on that.

i like the fat bald man's knowledge of the what's of usabiliy then.

print.Action · 13-08-2007, 14:26

I'd have to say I agree with the guy. He's not saying web 2.0 is bad, it's just that so many sites now are so focused on getting that web 2.0 look, that they design for the principal of web 2.0(glossy header, glossy logo, drop shadows, links everywhere) rather than designing to create a solution for content. I have seen companies with very unique brand and stance get lost in the pile of "web2.0" sites. It pains me to see companies stifle their own creative ideas to fit in with what web2.0 wants.

samuelcotterall · 13-08-2007, 18:05

Nielsen needs to be taken with a pinch of salt.

His ideas are sound, and from a pure usability standpoint they are correct (as long as you trust his "don't perform usability tests on more than five people" method) - but there comes a time when aesthetics are equally as important.

I think we are very much in a transitional stage right now, where AJAX and Flex are allowing for richer applications, but users are still expecting every site to look like useit.com - thankfully we are making that transition with the user in mind (more so than ever).

If you are looking for a local Chinese restaurant then you can look in the Yellow Pages, or you can look on Google Maps. They both display the same information in a different way, but who is to say which is more usable?

djeglin · 14-08-2007, 04:08

I think the point here is important, regardless of whether you agree with good old Jacob or not.

Too many people designing web applications don't take usability into account. They don't really think about interaction design, and their applications are worse off for it. There is also a trend emerging for big companies just "tacking on" social elements to their sites for no real reason, just because Web 2.0 is something thet have latched on to.

All this having been said, there are some real exceptions to the "web 2.0 = poorly designed user experience" rule. Basecamp, for one, is excellently designed, and Facebook must be pretty usable, if even my girlfriend can get around it without my help!

Jacob also needs to look at other ares before he opens his mouth sometimes - I bet if he took a look at google docs, he would absolutely slate it for usability, but the fact it follows a recognised office suite paradigm for user interaction makes it usable. People are used to it, regardless of the fact that, say, Microsoft office is a horribly designed application.

misterphotoshop · 14-08-2007, 23:47

strange how he preaches usability while his own site isn't very user friendly imo

Although I do agree with some of the ideas.

CherryKeri · 20-08-2007, 12:38

I could never understand why Jacob Nielsen is considered the most Web-wide usability expert... I would agree with some of his thoughts, but if you look on his website, you'll barely find it usable. And if you do, then you definitely won't find it attractive!!!

amitavroy · 05-09-2007, 01:58

well he has his own views on the topic but i think that the main thing is what we want form a site. today a visitor on orkut has a lot of time. but if the pages to load slowly he will run away to other SNS site. and also if the working is not easy to understand then also he will get discouraged. after all first impression is the last one.
so i think web 2.0 is suitable for some kind of websites. all websites cant haev the same way of design. like a photogrpaher cannot use web 2.0 sites cause he will have more images and not much text.,
Regards
Amitav Roy
Web Design Mumbai, Graphic Design Mumbai, Navi Mumbai - Pixel Groups

Snowshiro · 05-09-2007, 02:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by CherryKeri

I could never understand why Jacob Nielsen is considered the most Web-wide usability expert...

For the same reasons that Bill "Fuckwit" Thompson has a weekly column on the BBC Website and considers himself an expert on, well... pretty much everything.

29-06-2007, 14:24	#1 (permalink)
hiteshmehta hiteshmehta Join Date: May 2007 Location: Chennai \| India Posts: 23	I totally disagree with Jakob Nielsen on Web2.0 “Distracts Good Design” I wanted to share this link with you all since this blog post was the first reaction on may 15th after Jakob Nielsen spoke about web2.0 distracts good design. Read/Write Web also linked this blog post and you can check out the multiple reactions at: I totally disagree with Jakob Nielsen on Web2.0 'Distracts Good Design'

13-08-2007, 04:17	#9 (permalink)
Do Gooder Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,304	i have read a bit of Jacob's stuff. He really helped me understand usability and i have allot of respect for him... thoroughly recommend reading his stuff - a bit boring, though it is. agreed he does go a bit too far at times - his own website is a testament to that. __________________ anti social marketing

13-08-2007, 08:35	#11 (permalink)
Do Gooder Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 4,304	hehe. his looks match is web design skills. but as a usability chap - i feel the man knows his stuff. __________________ anti social marketing

13-08-2007, 18:05	#15 (permalink)
samuelcotterall Interactionist Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Manchester Posts: 174	Nielsen needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. His ideas are sound, and from a pure usability standpoint they are correct (as long as you trust his "don't perform usability tests on more than five people" method) - but there comes a time when aesthetics are equally as important. I think we are very much in a transitional stage right now, where AJAX and Flex are allowing for richer applications, but users are still expecting every site to look like useit.com - thankfully we are making that transition with the user in mind (more so than ever). If you are looking for a local Chinese restaurant then you can look in the Yellow Pages, or you can look on Google Maps. They both display the same information in a different way, but who is to say which is more usable? __________________ itssamuel.com, a tumblelog

14-08-2007, 04:08	#16 (permalink)
djeglin goober :-) Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Birmingham, UK Posts: 518	I think the point here is important, regardless of whether you agree with good old Jacob or not. Too many people designing web applications don't take usability into account. They don't really think about interaction design, and their applications are worse off for it. There is also a trend emerging for big companies just "tacking on" social elements to their sites for no real reason, just because Web 2.0 is something thet have latched on to. All this having been said, there are some real exceptions to the "web 2.0 = poorly designed user experience" rule. Basecamp, for one, is excellently designed, and Facebook must be pretty usable, if even my girlfriend can get around it without my help! Jacob also needs to look at other ares before he opens his mouth sometimes - I bet if he took a look at google docs, he would absolutely slate it for usability, but the fact it follows a recognised office suite paradigm for user interaction makes it usable. People are used to it, regardless of the fact that, say, Microsoft office is a horribly designed application. __________________ My signature sucks.

29-06-2007, 18:19	#2 (permalink)
cjgraphix Website Developer Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Pacific Northwest Posts: 334	He's right though. So many designers/developers are so focused on the user interactivity of web2.0, that the content (which is king) gets pushed aside or removed altogether. This idea that web2.0 is a design style ends up hurting more than it helps too. Now, I don't think web2.0 is all that bad. But I see what he's saying. There will be backlash from 2.0, and 3.0... we'll just have to wait and see what, or how costly, the backlash is. Remember, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

29-06-2007, 23:17	#3 (permalink)
Snowshiro Will work for Marmite Join Date: May 2007 Location: Sapporo, Japan Posts: 574	I wrote some rant about Nielsen somewhere else in this forum. One visit to his personal website (his idea of how design should be) is enough to make you want to slit your wrists from the boring banality of it. As I said previously Nielsen is as much of a design Nazi as the wanky art-for-arts sake brigade. He's just at the other extreme. If real life mirrored his ideas, we'd all have L and R tattooed on our hands and feet to help us remember which was which.

03-07-2007, 04:51	#4 (permalink)
Haris Registered User Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 11	Well, who is Jakob Nielson? I totally disagree with him. He doesn't know what web2.0 means. Web 2.0 is all about content and features and less design that's why minimal designs are used on web 2.0 sites.

06-07-2007, 13:01	#5 (permalink)
D856C Information Designer Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 54	I don't think it's only about minimal design, but about the bandwagon effect. To many people are wanting to go web 2.0 in the worst possible way -- and succeeding famously. BTW, Jabob Nielsen: Web 2.0 'neglecting good design' is the other thread about this. Most people won't do a usability test with real humans (social). Rather they will dub their construction Web 2.0 and assume social factors not in evidence (antisocial). Web 2.0 can be good for usability or bad. The proof isn't Jacob's seal of approval -- it's testing. (With humans ...in case that wasn't clear). Usability for Rich Internet Applications may be the first and only article people who have read dozens of ruby and AJAX tutorials ever read. Hint: If you don't read about it -- or apply the principles -- don't assume it automagically happens. Usability 2.0? is a look at what usability should be for Web 2.0 apps. Again, if you assume usability is baked into Web 2.0 by default, you need to rethink your assumptions.

10-08-2007, 14:18	#6 (permalink)
stupid dog Professional Beer Drinker Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: New River, Arizona Posts: 90	If Jacob had it way, every hyperlink would still be blue underlined! While he has some useful insights, I still wonder if he just never understood the difference between mainframe app designs and the designing for the 'real' interent

12-08-2007, 20:14	#7 (permalink)
D856C Information Designer Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 54	I'm sure the Scrolovers site would change Jacob's mind with the 'real' internet - which is really about what you can do with hyperlinks when you have too much time on your hands.

13-08-2007, 07:51	#10 (permalink)
forbes Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Belfast Posts: 746	neilson is fat and bald and needs to shut the hell up! i hate how people like him think they can dictate how websites should look like. i agree websites have to be usable for everyone, but design wise i dont really think he's in a position to judge unless he's a well-known prolific designer which he's not... also i agree with the bandwagon effect with web 2.0, nothing is original anymore...

13-08-2007, 14:26	#14 (permalink)
print.Action Registered Loser. Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Minnesota most of the time. Posts: 77	I'd have to say I agree with the guy. He's not saying web 2.0 is bad, it's just that so many sites now are so focused on getting that web 2.0 look, that they design for the principal of web 2.0(glossy header, glossy logo, drop shadows, links everywhere) rather than designing to create a solution for content. I have seen companies with very unique brand and stance get lost in the pile of "web2.0" sites. It pains me to see companies stifle their own creative ideas to fit in with what web2.0 wants.

14-08-2007, 23:47	#17 (permalink)
misterphotoshop Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Ontario Posts: 137	strange how he preaches usability while his own site isn't very user friendly imo Although I do agree with some of the ideas.

20-08-2007, 12:38	#18 (permalink)
CherryKeri Registered User Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 32	I could never understand why Jacob Nielsen is considered the most Web-wide usability expert... I would agree with some of his thoughts, but if you look on his website, you'll barely find it usable. And if you do, then you definitely won't find it attractive!!!

05-09-2007, 01:58	#19 (permalink)
amitavroy Web Designer Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 64	well he has his own views on the topic but i think that the main thing is what we want form a site. today a visitor on orkut has a lot of time. but if the pages to load slowly he will run away to other SNS site. and also if the working is not easy to understand then also he will get discouraged. after all first impression is the last one. so i think web 2.0 is suitable for some kind of websites. all websites cant haev the same way of design. like a photogrpaher cannot use web 2.0 sites cause he will have more images and not much text., Regards Amitav Roy Web Design Mumbai, Graphic Design Mumbai, Navi Mumbai - Pixel Groups

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

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search