Forum Moderators: phranque
I think the days of static pages are seriously numbered. At present, if you check through any small business sector you'll find hundreds and thousands of sites written using Front Page or DreamWeaver or any other number of WYSIWYG editors but as blogging and CMS software becomes more widely accepted I think we'll start to see the web design landscape change dramatically.
Indeed, Macromedia is already heading that way [macromedia.com]...
So, where does this leave the humble web designer? Will we end up as template designers working primarily with blog/cms software or will the bar be raised in terms of skill sets like server-side languages as we are forced to compete with technology that again empowers the non-webby but like the Front Page boom, leaves a huge swathe of poorly designed sites out there for hapless joe public?
For me, it's all good.
What do you think?
Nick
Yes, you're pretty much right I'd say, though as for 'changing the landscape', it'll probably just result in a desert of templated-lookalikes.
However, CMS/database stuff is, I would say, always going to be sledgehammer-to-crack-a-nut for a lot of mom 'n pop stuff, and a lot of designers are never going to go near it, and these, along with the Flash brigade, should keep a lot of work outside the CMS arena.
My personal target is to use PHP/MySQL along with content containers, but make this invisible to the user, with sites still having a 'hand-rolled' appearance.
My personal target is to use PHP/MySQL along with content containers, but make this invisible to the user, with sites still having a 'hand-rolled' appearance.
Exactly, Mat.
Being a relative php newbie, I don't understand the disconnect between CSS-P and PHP that seems to exist with many CMS-based sites - there are some awful manglings of HTML into complicated table-based designs going on (and being flogged for a fortune).
I also don't see why copywriting (and, to a minor extent, optimisation) should be "dumbed down" by being handed to the client - they all have a copy of FrontPage so why shouldn't they design their own sites as well? Because someone else can do it better.
But I do understand that, like Flash, it's an easy sell for designers looking for a fancy sounding method to bump their bill up.
Blogs are seen as just personal sites with little value to the masses leaving CMS systems which I believe people will still want designing and setting up.
What will probably change is less updating work IMO.
As people get used to editing pages using web based forms as opposed to the actual source code or the somewhat daunting WYSIWYG interfaces I think the web will change.
Designers, consequently, will need to change too. I'm sure we'll still be seeing 10 page static 'online biz cards' in 10yrs from now, tech just doesnt reach every corner of a market that quickly. But, savvy companies will be demanding more from their designers...
Nick
Think of an analogy to housing. At this point the basic methods of building a foundation and frame are well known, and anyone competent in the area can do this for you. While that has been established for enough time that anyone can pick it up, there still are plenty of architects, contractors, and designers out there because their creativity is still unique and separates them from KB Homes.
In web design, the foundation and framing are still being developed and blogs and cms may go towards standardizing the way the basics of sites are built, but that won't bring the end of web design.
Much like I am going to hire an architect with a great vision, I am going to do the same with a web designer. I assume that the framing and foundation are basic skills that all designers must possess, but that creativity is what separates you.
However, when it comes right down to it. I'm not a design artist and have no skills in that field. Our page was originally designed by a group who did great work in making the site look great. Their technical skills were on the weak side but they were very good at what they did; design pages.
I think this will ultimately boil down to cfx211's analogy of houses. As there will always be room for good, quality architects in the world, there will always be room for good, quality web designers.
And... after mentioning all that we haven't even touched the subject of html. Programming? Databases? Web servers? All separate tasks.
I find it useful to distinguish between front-end and back-end (and even to make a few interim groups at each stage). For some projects one man can do all, for others, a team may be employed at each stage.
/claus
I think the web designer needs most of all to be an Information Architect, then a usability specialist in support of that architecture.
CMS driven sites without a solid structure and navigation are a disaster, and I've recently been called to help repair one for a site that dropped from 6,000 responses a week to 10, after rolling out their new CMS-based marvel.
It's not the CMS itself, it's the vision of the project manager that makes the difference.
One was using the DOM Model accessible through javascript, the other was using the XML classes .Net provides, which is basically the same technique as the javascript one.
But is it at the expense of designers? Perhaps. I knew I was killing a potential revenue stream by giving site owners the power of doing their own content maintenance (which I loathe anyway, never wanted the job). Now these pre-fabbed CMS systems may render my high-priced custom skills obsolete, at least to a degree. So be it... can't stand in the way of progress. Between Google, CSS, CMS/Blogs, and the death of the dot-com era content will reign king.
where does this leave the humble web designer?
Free to design. Good system will leave a lot a design flexibility. I do think it's wise for designers to learn how to interact with backend systems though. Even simple things like breaking an HTML page into header and footer files escapes some otherwise decent designers I've seen.
The lower end CMS systems do rely on scripted pages to generate content but it certainly is not the only way to do this. Take for example Atomz's Publish [atomz.com] tool. This tool uses their server to generate your website based on template pages. Once the templates are built, you can add on, edit and delete pages as you see fit - all on Atomz's server. From there, you publish your website to your server as all static pages.
Granted this uses templates. But I believe that the technology will become more complex. Rather than us using DW or AGL to produce a GUI - we'll use an online services tool to do it. The tools will all be there and we will apply the same skills we do now. The only difference is the app resides on a server someplace on the planet rather than on our own machine.
The point is that web services will become ubiquitous. Adding on a calendar or shopping cart will be as simple as choosing different modules offered by the App. THink vending machine here. We're already seeing it in the hosting options. Every host service that I've dealt with over the past few years (a dozen or so) has some form of option GUI that you simply pick and choose your add ons.
Then I read this thread saying how content management systems could be the future..
Have I made a horrible mistake?
No. Rolling your own CMS is quite an acheivable goal IMO. It'll be better suited to your needs and you'll be able to 'tinker' with it more easily. My point was just that the days of genuinely static websites are numbered as software solutions (mostly packaged) become more widespread...
I roll my own CMS's and untill someone comes out with a real SE friendly one I'll keep doing just that..
Welcome to WebmasterWorld btw ;)
Nick
Hey, we're working on the same stuff... on the same schedule. :D
Nick
All they need to do is have a little lookup table for bots so as not to serve them SID's, better page titling, description tagging and H1 etc text.
Aside from that it's really not bad.
Anyone else got an SEO customised version?
TJ
Nearly 3 years ago we started producing bespoke dynamically driven sites, offering built in SE friendly styling <H1,2…>, <p>…, online WYSIWYG editors, dynamically driven meta data, dynamically driven titles, etc, and thought (at the time) that it was the db’s. However, less than 10% of the clients actually REALY use the facilities that were there, and wrote good copy, despite having paid at least 100% more for these FANTASTIC features.
Recently we’ve redesigned a few html sites for a client who had ditched his old design company (what an awful task;( ), however, the client has really get into writing good copy, we did the rest, so it’s full circle.
Anyway ramble over the only clear factors are that budget, time and willingness to learn how to use the technology means some people can and will use it. Everyone else needs to pay someone to do it for them.
Rich
(sorry if I've gone off topic here)
