Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: ergophobe
Why? Does this diversity reflect a self-conscious attempt by these sites to set themselves apart, or is each design just aesthetically and functionally optimal for its site? And, what we'd all like to know: is one layout generally better than another?
Ok, that did actually have a point. And that is that there will never be a survey or set of statistics that proves which is best, and for 2 reasons:
1. "Good" sites (sites that have something everyone wants) WILL succeed in spite of bad design. I'm not saying eBay is poorly designed, i'm saying that it doesn't matter, as long as the content is reachable- and then people like us will sit here and say that design is successful, when really it could very well be holding back even more sales because of its inferiority. Point here is that you can never really know what's driving what: the design --> the success, or the success --> the perception of good design.
2. Some designs make more sense one way than they do the other... so even if there were a magic layout, you'd often find that your site just doesn't look right with the magic layout. News sites look great as liquid/full-width layouts as far as i'm concerned, because you need the flexibility of letting people resize the content so it's easy on the eyes, and because as a full-width design, you get more of a newspaper-in-your-face look. I don't feel that way about artist or musician sites necessarily, as there is often more focus on detail, and the more you can direct the eye, the better. Plus, a lot of artistsic content should not be resizable, scalable, moveable... it's in its current state for a very good reason.
I hate to answer every question on this forum with "it depends", but... it depends. Your content, your marketing, your users, your users' hardware, your competitors, the trends of the net... i think people have done enough to prove what doesn't work AT ALL (horizontal scrollbars), and beyond that, it's all up to the variables.
Point here is that you can never really know what's driving what: the design --> the success, or the success --> the perception of good design.
Just a question Don, is it actually true %63 prefer left-justified or were you being facetious about the whole thing? I actually started this thread because I am working on a data-oriented site for which centered, left-aligned, and full-width layouts all seem like valid options.
If it weren't for whatever-made-someone-decide-on-navigation-on-the-left-side I bet we would have more right-side navigation. It makes more intuitive sense on the right, with the scroll bar being on the right.
I think the same is true for page alignment. There used to be little choice but to left-align the page. Now with options, it's still a matter of breaking through the barrier of what people are used to.
I have witnessed many instances where people prefer a horrible solution simply because it falls within their comfort zone. And, being the case, perhaps it's not such a bad solution after all.
Inuwolf- lol, no... those numbers were definitely conjured up in my head... but hey, who would question you if you were to pass them off as valid stats?
My point there was that you could probably gather stats to prove the superiority of ANY reasonable design layout if you searched long enough for the right focus group... so it's really quite superficial to try to do anything in that vein.
Not that superficiality has ever stopped statisticians before.