Thoughts on Slight Site Re-Design?

In my downtime, Iā€™m continuing to tweak the web siteā€™s layout and design a bit. My main goals are to make it look cleaner so that the content gets the bulk of the attention. The other is to reduce the page file size by removing a lot of legacy cruft in various HTML templates that have been there since the late 90ā€™s. Yes, late 1990ā€™s!

I will keep updating this thread as I get more ideas thrown in, but first - here is my take on what the home page should look like:

What do you all think?

Cheers,
Kirupa

  • Whatā€™s the square thing before ā€œTutorials | Reactā€ ?
  • Nav ordering is interesting: A search icon, then three text things, then two icons, then some random space, then a text+large icon thing for your books. Could be fine, but I have no idea why the ordering is the way it is there.
  • What does this look like on a really wide monitor? Looks like itā€™d be wonderfully responsive for phones and such as is.
  • Dropshadow in the header looks too light given how long (in height) it is. Iā€™d expect a darker start to the gradient given how large it is.
  • Proper pluralization (?) is '90s and 1990s, I believe.
  • More broadly, related to the widescreen bullet above, I think the design reflects the skinniness of your historical design. Sort of like how 960px grids were popular in ~2009. Here it looks like youā€™re fitting your overall width based on the old widths that made sense when you first made the site.
  • Not enough margin between the main column and the secondary right column?
  • Why donā€™t the second column thumbnails fill the whole remaining width of the dropshadow area above?
  • Whatā€™s the width of the paragraph below the main orange title image? Youā€™d think that ā€œacross many layersā€ wouldnā€™t wrap as soon as it does in this comp.
  • The date format looks a bit weird for an American audience, if that is your primary audience. Not that itā€™s difficult to read, but DD M YYYY reads, if nothing else, a bit more like British English to me.
  • Thereā€™s a newletter?! Sign me up!!!
  • Dropping the .com is still okay with me.
  • I think itā€™s a bit too self-aware to call your content content. (=

:2c:

1 Like

Kril - The best 2cents ever! :stuck_out_tongue:

  1. The square thing is just a design element. It doesnā€™t have to be there. Tutorials and React will each be links that take yo to their respective page. This solves one of my personal frustrations with the site. When seeing a tutorial, you have no way of seeing other related tutorials in that category.

  2. I think of the books as more of an ā€œadā€ or marketing thingy. That is why I right-aligned them. With that said, that does look a bit odd. Iā€™ll play with that a bit more.

  3. The width of the page will be fixed to mimic the width of a book, but making it responsive for phones is one of the big goals.

  4. Good point. Iā€™ll play with that. Longer term, I donā€™t want a plain white header. I would like for its background color to be customizable a bitā€¦just like this site had many years ago when the header was done entirely in Flash!

  5. English Sminglish! :uk:

  6. I should increase the width to something that is wider than 960-ish, right?. The content pages will have no 2nd column - at least as I am thinking about it right now. It will just be one column with just the article. Going too wide might make the reading experience a bit funny. Let me get some visuals up for what those sections look like as well.

  7. The drop-shadow area is similar to how the site is today where the content of the header is centered on some fixed width. The drop-shadow itself extends the full width of the monitor. I am keeping all of the content (the 1st and 2nd column) constrained to that same artificial width.

  8. Yep! That was a mockup bug. Iā€™ll fix that when uploading some revised visuals :slightly_smiling:

  9. I really wanted to avoid commas. A lot of the papers I wrote in high-school and college used that way of specifying the dates, so I never thought much about it haha.

  10. There is, but I havenā€™t actually sent anything on it. If you scroll towards the bottom of any part of the main site, youā€™ll see a dark area with the site logo and a field where you can enter your e-mail address and sign up.

  11. It looks weird. Maybe I am just too accustomed to seeing it there!

  12. Haha. Iā€™ll revise that to say something like Tutorials!

Looks nice. I actually like the dropping of .com. Keep the dates as they are (British English is far superior to American ;)). Maybe Iā€™ll be more constructive at a later date (ie after I have some unearned yet sorely needed sleep).

1 Like

I would go with KISS principle :wink: And more seriously, have you thought about putting posts below header horizontal not vertical?

Adam - do you have an example of what you mean about putting posts horizontally as opposed to vertically? Are you referring to the new videos or the new tutorials? :slightly_smiling:

Like here: http://www.theguardian.com - youā€™ve got two posts below the header, one next to another. It looks neat and itā€™s easier to read. By the way, The Guardian made a lot of studies before they launched their new website and - ā€œIndicators such as eye-tracking and heat maps revealed that the long vertical columns of text, which in a way reflected the layout of the newspaper, were not conducive to an engaging reading experience.ā€ (qoute frome the article: https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/key-principles-behind-the-new-guardian-website/s2/a563921/). Of course itā€™s an onilne newspaper but also a good benchmark.

2 Likes

Adam - thanks for that information! Iā€™ll see what I can do in a future revision where Iā€™ll try to arrange new articles horizontally :slightly_smiling:

Kirupa, I am glad I could help :slight_smile: Hope you will show us soon some updates of your project. Good luck!
Cheers,
Adam