webpages: contents or looks?

[adlag]

I am new here, so I hope my thread is not out of place.

I am a scientist, very much interested in web development. In science it is all about content. Although glossy journals like Science and Nature spend much effort in producing graphically appealing issues. In such a way, they hope to attract a broader readership.

What is important in web sites: content or looks? I see many web sites with irritating graphics, delay screens. But I am - like you I suppose - in a hurry. I just want to see where I have to click to get my information. I do not want to scroll. I want to get the things that the page offers done in a minimum of time.

On my blog (www.sciencesurvivalblog.com) I give the irritating example of login boxes that appear bottom right (to put input in them scrolling right and down is necessary).

So my question is: can't you guys spend more attention on minimizing the necessary interaction time between user and web page. Your users will show their gratitude (for instance by coming back regularly). Delaying your users by forcing them to be pathfinders will be counterproductive

[Scriptage]

To be honest it all depends on the type of website that you are producing; for example, the w3c's website is very minimalistic as their content is just technical documentation, therefore, people who visit the website just want to get at the information that they need and leave. In websites such as blogs the content is king as the very nature of the site is the content, the opinion and the musings of the individual.

When one views a corporate website there is a certain level of expectation of quality i.e., in the graphic design and layout that inspires assurance of legitimacy in the end user; for many companies the website user interface is the first point of contact for many future clients and therefore the first impression needs to be outstanding.

The way many designers are going nowadays is to provide a full featured GUI and degrade gracefully for accessibility (i.e., blind users, mobile users). If one prefers to not use a GUI then a text only (accessible) version is available on most major websites.

Kind Regards

Carl

[ray326]

What is important in web sites: content or looks?Content.
So my question is: can't you guys spend more attention on minimizing the necessary interaction time between user and web page.That is the whole thrust of the "standards-based" developers.

[rpgfan3233]

Content is king usually.

[NogDog]

Content is the most important thing to a web site (i.e.: why have a web site if you have no content?), but design, if properly and intelligently done, can enhance that content, making it both easier and more enjoyable to use.

Unfortunately, when things are put in the hands of marketing managers and web design geeks, a lot of times it seems that the "media is the message." Too few people responsible for the creation of web sites really understand how to use the graphic arts to improve the usability of a site. (I'm not talking about personal sites and some "artsy" sites where anything goes, because it really doesn't matter; rather I'm concerned with the sites that are trying to make money or provide a public service, but fail to achieve as much as they potentially could due to poor usability and design.)

Some useful references:
Don't Make Me Think (http://www.sensible.com/buythebook.html)
www.webpagesthatsuck.com

[WebJoel]

Definately, content.
I should like blogs more than I do. They tend to be about content. I liked your blog, -esp. the 'should we pay referees' article and the reason against peer reviews (not receiving credit for their doing so). I guess that is like techincal writing: they 'proofread' and correct the grammarical errors and explain the meaning in as succinct and natural manner as possible, overcoming any difficulty in graspiing the meaning. But the work is and remains the author's.
A good techincal writer makes the author look good, and only receives a minor acknowledgement in the preface. But if they love writing (other's as well as their own), it's the career for them.
I love content. I love to read it and it doesn't matter if it is some technical journal about spacecraft sent to Mars or a page devoted to beanie-babies and cabbage-patch dolls. -If the information is honest, accurate and truthful and means someting to the author, it's all good!

[toicontien]

I'd say both are important, and I would like to echo some of NogDog's comments. People go to your site for content. Design makes the content easy to find and digest. Design can also provide an atmosphere or mood, which can further enhance the content. Just how much design is necessary depends on the content. Technical docs require little design. A movie web site however, calls for a much more complex, visual and perhaps interactive design, as the content is the movie, and the mood of the movie is important in getting you to watch the movie.

But the overriding message is that design enhances the content. Design is not content unless you have a web site devoted to design.

[Scriptage]

But the overriding message is that design enhances the content. Design is not content unless you have a web site devoted to design.

I have to say that I disagree; take these two builders' websites:

http://www.buildersbarnsley.com/ and http://www.redrow.co.uk/cms/wrrd/overview

Ignore the content on both pages and focus on the design; which builder would you employ to build you a house?

The way that I think is as follows: If a company is sloppy enough to purchase a poorly designed website are they going to be sloppy in other areas of the business? Will the end product be of the same quality as their website? Are they a small company that does not handle big projects i.e., small turnover, can't afford a good website? Will this affect their performance on a big project?

In business image is key, that's why big companies spend millions on branding.

Kind Regards

Carl

[toicontien]

But when you surf both sites, you don't notice the design. On the first site, you notice the mistakes. On the second site, you notice the content, and the main navigation areas of the site. Your first reaction is "this is nice and organized and I can find what I want." Your first reaction isn't "Hey! Niiiiiiice design! I'll hire these guys."

I never said image wasn't key, but for web sites, the design must enhance the content. Design is important because it helps to convey a message. Design for design's sake is never good, unless you are showcasing your design skills.