Form over function is always a mistake for a website unless it's meant to be a work of art that's only visited once or twice. Just look at Google, Craigslist, and Drudgereport. These are among the most popular sites on the internet and yet they're plain as can be. It's because they're functional. Websites are like tools. They need to work well more than they need to look good.
usability is greatly improved but all the main sports sites have been hitting on terrible new visual layouts including this one. Big empty spaces and large boxes for no reason.
I'm wondering how much can be fixed with some custom CSS injection via a browser v extension. I may take a look at that this weekend. If I come up with something nice I'll post it
Depends what the website is for.
Not true. I will always hate the ribbon interface of MS Office. I have learned to adapt to it. When I try to explain it to my wife, her eyes glaze over.Anyone who has gone through web design change at work the reaction is always the same....you don't like it but within 30 days you forget the old design.
I understand what you're saying, but for me, a lot of those pages with the extra graphics, high-res photos, and videos slow down the loading times to the point where I don't want to bother clicking on them any more. It's not uncommon these days for me to see an interesting headline, note where the link goes, and skip clicking on it because I know the site will be a slog to load. And I'm on Verizon Fios with a new combo laptop/tablet. It's getting to be annoying.The sites you listed are utilitarian. Google serves very specific purposes, as does Craigslist - they don't have to look good because you need to be there. A media site, on the other hand, needs to look good. Interface is really less important and limited to clicking "play" on a video or "read article".
Take the home page here. I click "forums" as fast as I can and rarely pay any attention because it looks like crap - tiny blurbs and over-cropped mug shots. With a more attractive design with large, high-res photos (think "front page" instead of "middle of the local section"), I'd actually spend time scrolling and reading. The user interface could be exactly the same (i.e. click headline to get to story/ "sign up now" screen), but it'd get more readers, guaranteed. Imagine a news site of any kind that has no photos and white writing on a black background, maybe in a weird font. You never even found out what the user interface was like because you left in under 10 seconds to read the story elsewhere.
I liked the old uniforms but I started loving the new ones especially the black ones. I like the new look.
![]()
Yes...please bring back the red highlighted messages!Before I could tell the messages I had already read, because they
were highlighted in red. So I could go right to the new ones. Now It
takes for effort. and also the people name who started the posts
was much easier to read. All in all, don't know why they sent to all
these changes for something that could have been done better.
I guess we live in a society that the new or younger have to change things
just for the sake of change.
I agree with runumbers. This has been a disaster and this poll results prove it.[/It feels and looks more like Facebook with the likes button, as for the overall look there is no background color and that bothers my eyes. Can be really funtional and possibly more interactive w a few tweeks- for me the jury is still out on this design.