Forum Moderators: open
http://www.pixelsurgeon.com/pages/interview/design/jakobnielsen/index.html [pixelsurgeon.com]
I noticed that as well! Also, in IE changing the size of your Text (from medium to large) makes absolutely no difference!
I also found that the list of links on the main front page [pixelsurgeon.com] almost unreadable.
That and they have a splash page [pixelsurgeon.com]!
I was really surprised to see this with such small
text considering the topic.
Have a great day,
Louis
I would too if Macromedia gave me a big check for usability consultations!
By the way, as per the previous discussion on colorblindness and contrasting colors - I don't know if it looks that way for everyone, but lots of the stuff on their pages is completely unreadable because the grey values are almost the same and the colors only slightly different. One of the worst sites ever.
Perhaps it should be nominated for the web pages that suck hall of shame.
Tom
Balance, balance is the keyword. No reason why a site can't look good AND be usable.
Looking forward to the revamp of pixel surgeon!
We don't do flames, please be polite.
Quite frankly, I think THIS site is really droll in terms of usability. I tried registering with this site just to post a reply, and it really was such a mission.
And if you people can't read the Jakob Nielsen interview, then perhaps you need to get your eyes checked out.
Ergophobe, if you couldn't find the email link to contact Pixelsurgeon, then you apparently do not know the difference between a "splash page" and a "home page"? Obviously the splash page (the bar of soap) is NOT going to contain a contact link - try going to the HOME page, where the contact details can be easily accessed.
And as for your comment "lots of the stuff on their pages is completely unreadable because the grey values are almost the same and the colors only slightly different" - when you read a novel, do you want there to be loads of different colours all over the page so that it is "easier to read"?
[edited by: FlashLady at 3:50 pm (utc) on June 20, 2002]
[edited by: NFFC at 3:54 pm (utc) on June 20, 2002]
We don't do flames, please be polite.
And I have to say that this is one of the (many) great things about webmasterworld. I have been on mailing lists and community boards where all people seem to do is start and take part in flame wars. I generally leave as it indicates that there is little serious discourse about.
If you have an opinion on something and have a point to make - make it. There is such a diverse and intellegent grouping of people here that you'll get people agreeing and disagreeing with you, but all making constructive points.
In this way we can learn more about the prefession we are in. Blatant flaming just kills debate, IMHO.
Unless you see something else. Their background color is not white like a novel would be. They are using 9px which for most users is difficult to read. Usually 9px is fine print. Their target audience is designers. We are able to cope with that. As a designer I try to make things pretty. Pretty is not always useable. I found their site a little cluttered and confusing, but it is very nice and professional.
Here is a recent discussion on splash screens.
[webmasterworld.com...]
<added>
Have you seen paynts new user thread?
[webmasterworld.com...]
</added>
[edited by: korkus2000 at 3:19 pm (utc) on June 20, 2002]
* Pixelsurgeon = extremely useable. Webmasterworld = frustrating to fathom.
* Text on Pixelsurgeon interview is perfectly legible.
* Splash page is different to home page.
* Pixelsurgeon colour scheme makes for perfectly useable navigation, reading, and general useage.
* For alternative views, visit the other thread.
Does anyone genuinely believe I was not making valid points?
when you read a novel, do you want there to be loads of different colours all over the page so that it is "easier to read"?
Possibly, but you do not want the font colour of the novels text to be in a very light grey colour on a white background? The lack of contrast between foregroud text and background colour would make it unreadable, and therefore unuseable. Nor would you want the font size to be so small that it is close to unreadable without a magnifying glass.
Ditto for the front page (not the splash page :)) links on the right.... they are in a very small font and they are so difficult to make out that (I think) users will not bother trying to decipher what they are.
Now, my monitors is at 1152x864 resolution so that may be exaggerating the problem... but I don't notice it on other sites... so I think that this is a huge useability issue here.
[edited by: BlobFisk at 3:32 pm (utc) on June 20, 2002]
Does anyone genuinely believe I was not making valid points?
Not at all... it's just that they were lost amongst the flames...
The point of this thread is that Jakob Nielson (everyone bow lowly ;)) is the web's crusader of usability. He is interviewed by a site that, by his own rules, would not pass his usability test.
One thing is that your splash page is cool - I find the rendering of the fight club bar of soap image humorous -but it is 121K - that IS kind of big for a splash page.
With that said I could careless about the usability of your site - It's not my business. I think that usability is something that should be addressed by the person creating the site - Everyone has their OWN priorities in web design.
Webmasterworld.com, is a great resource as is pixelsurgeon and they both have room for improvement (as do ALL websites). Lets not get flame wars started on this message board please. Childish arguements over a message board doesn't get anything accomplished.
The redesign template looks very, very nice. I look forward to seeing it in production!
Very nice! Just used a similar colour on a new site although I was a bit worrid about colour blindsness issues.
BTW a great thread here on that very subject:
[webmasterworld.com...]
We've had some wonderful discussions here lately about the limitations colorblind websurfers experience because of multi-colored sites designed without proper understanding of grey values... Obviously this is not a subject you are familiar with.
For more information about the concept of grey values and the necessity of good grey-value contrast to color-impaired users, this discussion would be of help:
[webmasterworld.com...]
In getting along on these forums in general, a less combative/insulting attitude would be of help. ;) We generally make a point of being civil with each other around here.
Text on Pixelsurgeon interview is perfectly legible
Legible if you're on a 19" screen set at 1024x768 or lower resolution. I have a 19" set at 1600x1200 and had to change my monitor settings to read the page.
THIS IS THE POLITE VERSION
(please stop deleting it)
<snip>
Ergophobe, if you couldn't find the email link to contact Pixelsurgeon, then you apparently do not know the difference between a "splash page" and a "home page"?
That's the polite version? I'm glad I missed the flames. One great thing about WMW is that it is one of the most polite forums on the web. People have strong disagreements, but I have yet to see one get personal. A great thing!
Anyway, for the record, yes, I do know the difference between a splash page and a home page. Though I wouldn't call myself a webdesign guru, I am a reasonably competent web surfer.
Obviously the splash page (the bar of soap) is NOT going to contain a contact link - try going to the HOME page, where the contact details can be easily accessed.
Aside from the fact that I would never make it to the home page of a site with such a slow splash page if not for this discussion, I did indeed get beyond the splash page and found a completely confusing home page. I think it's fair to say that I am not entirely alone in my opinion, since Jakob Nielsen (according to his opening comments in the interview) and several readers of this forum had the exact same reaction.
Anyway, I went back after reading your comment.
1. I still can't find an email link.
2. The color choice is still horrible. Maybe not with your hardware/eyes, but it is with mine (and Jakob Nielsen's).
3. The fonts are still way to small. Maybe not with your hardware/resolution/eyes, but they are with mine (and Jakob Nielsen's).
To me this is just another horrible example of site that is trying to be cool, and does so with tons of graphics, unreadable colors/fonts, annoying splash pages and so forth.
You may like and I may hate it, but ultimately that makes no difference. What does matter is whether or not it is generally usable and I would suggest that neither you nor I are experts on web usability. However, an undistputed web usability expert, who uses testable and emprical methods to come to his conclusions, analyzed the site and found it terribly lacking.
And as for your comment "lots of the stuff on their pages is completely unreadable because the grey values are almost the same and the colors only slightly different" - when you read a novel, do you want there to be loads of different colours all over the page so that it is "easier to read"?
No, I don't and that's why I so dislike PixelSurgeon. You clearly did not understand my comment and perhaps don't understand what it means to have contrasting grey values (as opposed to contrasting hues). The fundamental principle of black ink on near-white paper is that the *grey values are different* so that it makes no difference how you or your monitor render colors. My issue is with someone using hue (color) rather than shade (grey value) to make text stand out. There is too much variation in monitors/eyes for this to work. When I read a novel, I expecting a *huge* difference in grey values between the type and the background. When I read a web page I would like to see the same, but often don't because there are too many sites like pixelsurgeon.
Pixelsurgeon = extremely useable. Webmasterworld = frustrating to fathom.
Completely irrelevant. Assuming I agreed with you on this (I don't), the fact that webmasterworld, my site, yahoo or whatever is unusable in no way proves that pixelsurgeon is usable. Fundamental logical fallacy.
Pixelsurgeon may be extremely *useful* (lots of good information), but I would argue that it is not *useable* and that's all anyone here is saying.
Tom
Does anyone genuinely believe I was not making valid points?
I suspect the problem was that you chose to make your points in a way that contravened the TOS (although you already knew this, right?)
I disagree with most of your comments just the same, but clearly some people view web pages differently from others.
Pixelsurgeon was started as a simple couple of HTML pages that became very popular very quickly and since its launch a year ago, and we've never had a chance to go back and redesign the site: in fact if you look at both the splash page and the news page, the site claims to be in Beta, and the newly redesigned site is in fact the first proper version.
I take the issue of usuability seriously and accept that the current version of pixelsurgeon is not particularly user friendly: but this is the main reason why we are changing it, together with building a complex CMS that will allow our 30 or so contributors upload their own content.
To say that the type on Pixelsurgeon is too small is simply flogging a dead horse, because, you know it and I know it, so we're all in agreement. :D
But before I go I just wanted to say something about Jakob Nielsen. He has some interesting things to say and has been useful in stirring up the debate about usability and I'm sure his comments have had a direct influence on some of Flash MX's new features. But he's not a designer, so some of his comments have to be taken with a pinch of salt. In his comments about Pixelsurgeon he has not taken the context of the site nor the audience into consideration, which in my opinion is fundamental in the understanding and appreciation of a site. It's as silly as dismissing a site written in Japanese because you can't read it: it's for a Japanese audience! Likewise, Pixelsurgeon is aimed at Web Designers who LIKE splash pages, who get the Fight Club reference, who like our site to be graphics heavy, and - believe it or not - LIKE small type!
Generally I would have more respect for Jakob if his own site [useit.com] (and for that matter the Nielsen Norman Group [nngroup.com] website!) was not one of the most visually boring sites on the net! I'm sorry, but usability does not mean dull!
I was also disappointed when Jakob was asked how he felt about useit.com only achieving a C grade in an evaluation of 40 usability points identified by Nielsen himself. His reply that it was a pretty good score considering the budget implied that the more money you have, the better the usability, which is just not he case.
Jakob makes a good living at what he does, so good luck to him. The world would be a more boring place without him, for sure, but not all his pronouncements should be taken as gospel and his opinions should be scrutinised as closely as the designs we all do.
