Where Design Has Failed: Designing (Intentionally) for the Web

Programmers receive a lot of flack, typically, when they make their first few forays into the web design world. Besides (stereotypically) being unaesthetically focused designers, they usually design using one or two of the most common themes for layout.

Of course, programmers aren't the only ones guilty of this; I've encountered numerous "web designers" who have started as artists (typically on an analog medium) and decided that "doing a website would be easy".

The two most common layouts, in my experience, would be the header, horizontal menu, content, and footer, or the header, vertical menu (on the left rail), content, and footer.

Go ahead and do a quick browse on the 'net, and you'll see that most sites adhere to that at least at a basic level (including at least one of my own, which has been needing a redesign for well over a year). More complex sites, of course, utilize multiple positions for menu based on a hierarchy. At least most of the successful sites have built something that works for them, is usable, and is also aesthetic.

Then you've got the rest of the unwashed.

Don't get me wrong - some sites do really, really well with a basic layout. Some artists utilize whitespace in a creative manner and accommodate those of us with a taste of minimalism. My problem points towards another spectrum of designer, though. The kind that gets lazy, and either doesn't visualize well, or doesn't create a proper mockup.

Mockups are useful in that they allow us to create a visual without spending the time to code it, and recode it after you change a few little things that break the old code. It goes beyond that, however; sometimes, you'll find yourself frustrated even after doing a great mockup. You have something that should look beautiful, but either because of rendering issues in a browser, or your own inability to find a solution to a layout problem, you sacrifice aesthetics for ease of development.

Sometimes, it makes sense (in both cases). I've had customers who want to pay the bare minimum for my design work, so I have to create something that will be quick to code. That means going with a template I've made, which does include the two aforementioned crutches. I make a concerted effort, however, to ensure that it doesn't feel like a crutch and holds its own against other sites in the same market, if not standing stronger.

I hope this entry has inspired you to look past the standard templates and create something unique, interesting, and usable.

Aside: This entry was started about 6 months ago but never finished beyond an outline, until I found Classicwfl.com featured on Smashing Magazine's recent post on 40 Creative Design Layouts)

Incompetent Competition in Web Design

That's right, I'm not even justifying this post with an image.

I find it incredibly disgusting at how the web design industry has progressed in smaller communities. I look around at my competition and find that.. well.. they aren't truly worth being called competitors.

For the sake of saving face (and not screwing myself over professionally), I will avoid linking to any said "competitors", giving any names, or affording you any specifics on who you should be avoiding if you are seeking web design services - if you are curious, you can ask.

There are a number of businesses in the area that offer "professional" web design services for a modest (or insanely high) fee. The price usually varies - I know some who charge 14-year-old-in-his-mom's-basement prices, and some who charge more than high quality contract designers who have a waiting list a mile long. Either one seems to easily be able to dupe the local shops into contracting them for services that aren't even worth their time, let alone their finances.

For instance, I know of one company (yes, an actual company) that does their web design work in MS Word.

MS WORD. Not exactly a high class design tool.

Of course, there are some who actually know a little bit about web design. They can perhaps write a little markup language, or even use tables. The sad part is, the MySpace generation has aided in creating a mass breed of such designers, affording us little choice but to grab our pitchforks as professional web designers and go on a hunt to skewer these so called designers who aren't giving the client the products they need.

The technical market is suffering in rural areas, still. Clients don't research what they can get, and it shows - the amount of poor quality websites served up by sub-standard design firms is astounding. I'm not expecting perfection, but for Pete's sake, your damned abusive nested table based layout is costing the customer money in bandwidth costs!

Just because it is perceived as working doesn't mean it works well. Besides the aforementioned bandwidth costs, the lack of accessibility across various devices and platforms means that the person who contracted the designer isn't getting a full reach for their clients. Beyond that, a lack of SEO (Search Engine Optimization) means that even fewer eyeballs will even casually stumble upon the website unless they see a physically printed product.

Why the hell are designers like this surviving? What hasn't the market demanded more?

Because nobody bothered to educate the rural market about what they can get, and nobody will.

-WFL