Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 13:51:54 02/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
I think you will find that more strong chess players (& chess programmers & heavy users of chess software) are likely to prefer this design: http://www.sciencedaily.com/index.htm to this design: http://www.submethod.com (to use examples already mentioned in this thread). It may be a left-brain/right-brain thing. I also vote to avoid pop-ups. On February 18, 2002 at 16:35:02, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >On February 18, 2002 at 16:09:46, Ricardo Gibert wrote: > >>On February 18, 2002 at 15:36:04, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >> >>>On February 18, 2002 at 15:23:18, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On February 18, 2002 at 14:12:29, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>> >>>>>http://www.betachess.dk >>>> >>>>Lots of clicking without purpose. >>>> >>>>We can only ask ourselves, "Why?" >>>> >>>>Right off the bat, I find that I must click on something that says "[enter]". >>>> >>>>Now, I ask myself the question: >>>> >>>>Why did I type http://www.betachess.dk if it were not for the purpose of >>>>entering the site? >>>> >>>>Don't hide menus. >>>> >>>>Well, I guess if you are after some sort of "art neuveau" crowd or something >>>>maybe it is the effect you are after. >>>> >>>>For me, I like it simple. And the simpler the better. >>> >>>Actually if my site was any simpler it would be betachess.txt :) >>>That is why i hide the menu's, to make it simple. >>>The reason you have to enter is that there is a code which makes the window >>>pop up in a certain size, this ensures that all resolutions can veiw my site. >>>"art neuveau"?? what do you mean, i have no idea. >>> >>>Regards >>>Jonas >> >>Actually, DC's reponse was right on target. You need to "listen" better, rather >>than become defensive. > >I was not being defensive, just didn't quite understand what he was saying. > >>By simple, DC means no unnecessary techniques that you really have no >>justification for using. > >Actually there is a justification for this: >The "techniques" that i use have a purpuse, the [enter] ensures that the window >pops up in the size i want it to 650x500, but i already explained this. > >>I don't like the [Enter] screen either. >> >>Too much clicking means you should not require your vistors to click on thing to >>see anything. There are a couple of screens that should have presented at least >>one menu right off the bat rather than having the user having to activate one. >>Be something of a minimalist as far the number of clicks needed from the user to >>get around and figure out what to look at. Same goes for hovering the cursor for >>information. > >Actually this is a question of taste, not functionality, by clicking once to >enter the site and hovering your curser to navigate is just as functional as >anything else, but if you don't like it that's fine and i will take it into >consideration. > >>The first screen after entering is something of puzzle that is very annoying. >>Get rid of it. Also, not everybody has broadband, so the large graphic will be >>slow for them. > >It is only 35 Kb........ less than most. > >>The screens that follow (rating lists, etc.) are to slow on my 800mhz athlon >>with a cable modem. > >Well i know that they take some time to load the first time you load them, about >10 sec on a 56 k modem, but next time they should load in 2-3 secs max. > >>You keep using little tricks without justification. Reminds me of people who >>produce a site with a large variety fonts for no good reason. Same sort of >>thing. > >You make it sound like a conspiracy :) what do you mean exactly by "You keep >using little tricks without justification" ??? >I use different "tricks" to make a new approach, not to piss people off. > >>The following site uses an effective and simple basic design that is very >>flexible that I like a lot. Visitor's are immediately presented with a lot of >>summary information about what is in the site and are able to make informed >>decisions about what to look at in more detail in the rest of the site: >> >>http://www.theregister.co.uk/ > >I guess we look at effective and simple in different ways :) >This is one of my fav's: >http://www.blitzds.com >And one more: >http://www.submethod.com > >>Another site I like is: >> >>http://www.sciencedaily.com/index.htm >> >>There is a lot more I don't like about the site, but it is not worth the trouble >>pointing them out. Just remember, simple is better and I don't mean a screens >>devoid of useful information. That's annoying. > >Well i hear what you say, but you sound like you are genuinly annoyed :) > >Regards >Jonas
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.