actually good sites

[jeremynell]

A lot of people here seem to be very interested in what I call "bad design". I am sick of people trying to create sites that are viewable by every audience, everywhere, on every platform. That is just not cricket.

Websites are like commercials on tv - they must be created with the primary target in mind (which is not 100% of the world, but rather a very particular market). The secondary market is a lot broader.

Go to www.2advanced.com. This is one of the best "design" sites around, as well as many others (which I won't mention here). They don't care about what anyone thinks about splash pages, latest browsers, plugins, etc. And it works for them. They are with the program, as it were. If you don't like their way, go somewhere else.

Personally, I will never design, or even accept a project, that wants some Google-style design, or targeting an audience who uses anything less than 800x600 res.

I like technological advances, and use them. That's why they exist.

But, that's just me.


So show me some good sites now...

 

[dnslife]

there's something for everybody on the web!

 

[Anthony]

MassiveAttack looks awesome!

 

[shiggy]

Different sites for different purposes

For people out there saying look at successful sites such as google, yahoo, etc., I totally agree with you however you should also take into consideration that those sites are search engines, based on content.

Any corporate site that puts importance on branding, that is top car brands, clothing brands etc. will have more visually attractive sites. A simple design like google for Mercedez would look wrong right?

 

[HabboRadio.us]

Massive attack is one of the best sites my little eyes have seen!

 

[primacomputer]

A lot of people here seem to be very interested in what I call "bad design". I am sick of people trying to create sites that are viewable by every audience, everywhere, on every platform. That is just not cricket.

If by bad design you mean a site that gets information to the users eyeballs quickly without splash pages and then lets them bookmark the page so they can come back and buy then, yeah, I'm one of those people.

Websites are like commercials on tv - they must be created with the primary target in mind (which is not 100% of the world, but rather a very particular market). The secondary market is a lot broader.

Exactly. And the target market is not always under 25s more interested in eye candy than information.

Go to www.2advanced.com. This is one of the best "design" sites around, as well as many others (which I won't mention here). They don't care about what anyone thinks about splash pages, latest browsers, plugins, etc. And it works for them. They are with the program, as it were. If you don't like their way, go somewhere else.

I usually do go somewhere else. Unless I'm looking for flash design. It seems to me that all these “good designs” are about promoting this concept of “good design” to other people who think it's a “good design”. Oddly enough this site works just fine across a wide range of platforms. Just proof that you can make this type of design work everywhere if you are willing to put some effort into something other than just flash.

Personally, I will never design, or even accept a project, that wants some Google-style design, or targeting an audience who uses anything less than 800x600 res.

So I guess you'll never design a site for Google then. To bad, I hear they pay well.

I like technological advances, and use them. That's why they exist.

But, that's just me.

Well it's not really just you. There are plenty of others out there who are into eye candy just as much. Obviously I'm not one of them, but its seems like most other posters to this thread are.

 

[Rowan W]

This is not aimed at anyone in particular.

If you want to make a visually appealing site for no other reason than because you can, then go a head and make it but it won't serve any real purpose, unless you just want to show what you can do.

If you want to make a website to promote your business, provide information/data or to attract users then you don't need to have a "techonologically advanced" website with useless features here and there.

A lot of people here seem to be very interested in what I call "bad design". I am sick of people trying to create sites that are viewable by every audience, everywhere, on every platform. That is just not cricket.

I don't understand this statement. Is he saying that websites are bad if they work on any system? It's completely possible to make a website that looks good AND works anywhere. If that's his idea of "bad design" then what's "good design"? Does a website have to have animation, music and long load times to be good?

Whenever I visit a design site such as the previously mentioned sites I will look at it for about five minutes and then close it without even considering going back there again. They may be well made, but the only reason they exist is to show what they can do.

I would like for the poster of this thread to come back and explain exactly what is "good design".

 

[will7]

At the end of the day, it all comes down to target audience. Now, I am in no way saying 2A are not skilled, they are fantastically skilled - at what they do. They are aiming for the higher end of the market and use flash, fair enough, if it works for them - good.

But the point is, flash is not user-friendly. No matter what you do, it will never be. It has to load which, most of the time, takes ages, it limits display if you don't have flash player (most do, but some don't) and also, only pixel fonts look decent on it really and they can be hard to read.

IMO, the definiton of a good website is one with clean styling, clearly defined nav and one that is easy to read and get to information. But at the same time, you can make that site visually pleasing. You can, mostly, do what you can do in flash, in HTML. Obviously something like 2A would be very difficult, but I bet it's possible.

EDIT: And yes, there is one reason why all the successful sites are successful. Because of their content. Do you think people go on eBay coz they like their design? No, they go on their to take part in auctions! Do you think people go on Google coz of their design? No, they go on there to search. You get my point.

I will be impressed by a good flash site, sure I will, but I won't buy or recommend a friend. I'll take a look at the graphics, think, this is cool, then leave and go to a design company who have a simple and effective site (in my eyes) and use them.

^ That would be if I didn't already run my own design company

In conclusion, flash sites are good, but IMO, not for business sites. For a personal portfolio, great, but not for business. If it works for 2A, good for them, but for the majority, it probably won't. It's your target audience that matters!

 

[{insert name here}]

I agree with flash = bad!

When an entire site is that made like those two, I don't let it load all the way, and I'm gone. I don't care for, nor like complete flash sites. And for those who have slow conections, wow.

I think the bad design statement made was in poor tast. As design in not the overall factor in making a succesfull website!