Discuss further in the
Member's Forums

http://www.adobe.com/web/features/zeldman20000821/main.html

Note: Alternate link

Spotted by Robert Black

"Surely design in its essence is mearly what the creator captivates it be? - Websites need to be based around there target audience and only that should hold them back?! "the web is a blank canvas" ... True, yet one would not draw a detailed lanscape picture for a bright childrens book.. It is the target audience which should decide the content/design."

"Form always follows function, in Bauhaus tradition. Design is about communicating an idea not merely self expression"

"It is symptomatic I think, of a bigger picture an environment where designers (in a professional and education environment) are not looking at a clients communication "needs".

Briefs are always prefaced with "We need a brochure/booklet/directmail/website" and designers forget to ask why -"why do you want a brochure" - what is it meant to be doing.

I think this comes from strong corporate marketing departments, where clients are developing their communication strategies in-house and relying less on agencies but it is a poor excuse for designers and a tragedy that in the education environments the brief is to produce a specific object rather than to solve a communications problem.

(AGDA's design management document should be compulsory reading)

AGDA material on design management in general:

AGDA/ISS Fellowship Report: Design Management
And for AGDA members only:

Design Management Practice Note

"I've run into this topic before but in the field of music. Musicians discussing when the use of technique is overkill. Is it technique for the sake of technique, or does it serve its purpose by enhancing the song? Do you blow your wad to impress because you can, or do you hold it in reserve and let it out at a more appropriate moment?

I agree that we should embrace new web technologies. But we need to understand what they do and what their limitations are when it comes to incorporating them in the DESIGN of a site. There are a large palette of web tools at our disposal and a huge empty canvas. But do we use it all or carefully pick and choose based on a given design?

Does a corporate site need to be completely redone in Flash just because Flash exists? Or even include flash at all? Do sites constantly need to be the raddest thing out there?

Why isn't the use of video incorporated more as a 'technique' on sites? I think obviously because it's not as fun, takes longer for the user to download, and isn't as interactive and Flashy.

Deciding what technology is best used where, and how the site is best served by incorporating or NOT incorporating a given web technology should be part of design. Know what to use and when. And base it on the content and it's ultimate destination, the user, not on the fact that you know all the latest techniques and now have a chance to make the site look cooler than anything out there.

What you like to use and how you go about implementing it is a function of your personal style. If you're not thinking about how best to achieve a given result you're not designing. If all you're thinking is how best can 'I' use this cool effect or technique, you're doing nothing but styling, and you're not serving the project at hand, just feeding your ego.

"i enjoyed the column that zeldman wrote, it was very accurate. i read zeldman.com every day and i don't check many web pages routinely. if he had flash all over it, it would get annoying. if it was loaded with collages and pop-up windows i wouldn't care. i go back because he has very interesting, well-thought out ideas to present. this is known as content. content is why his page is successful. Mark McAleer tried to label the roll-overs on zeldman's page as useless and hypocritical. no, they are a simple navigational tool that help people understand the environment. i'm glad you are under 35 and consider yourself on the cutting edge, but i doubt you work for one of those companies that you speak so highly of, because you lack an understanding of communcation and design. if you are making serious work with "wowing" than you aren't saying anything and nobody will listen.

oh, and i'm 22, with an art education. so you can blow the "too old for this medium" theory good-bye.

"I think Jeffrey Zeldman has put into words something that I've always wanted to articulate.

His basic point, that when most people talk web design they're really talking web style, is very true and it seems to be something endemic (if not quite confined) to the web.

Designers in other industries (furniture, appliances, architecture) would never call themselves designers if they were only capable of making something that looked very cool. It has to be functional too. No real-world designer would present a design for, say, a toaster, that only concentrated on how it looked with no thought for whether or not a piece of toast could fit in it.

I am shocked every time I come across a so-called web designer who can make the most beautiful looking page layouts in photoshop but has no idea how, or even if, these designs can be transfered to the web.

In any field of design a designer most be familiar with his or her materials, tools and audience. If you design plastic objects, you are expected to know the properties of plastic, its limitations and advantages. It should be the same for web design. If you are planning on making a cool, usable web site then you must know about coolness, usability and the web. Knowledge of one won't make up for ignorance in the other.

It's an absolutely ludicrous situation that in the field of web design, style and usability are treated as polar opposites. Only someone who is an expert in both fields (and who knows their material, HTML, inside out) can truly be considered a designer.

"I think the message needs to truly be thus: the middleground is more important than the extremes. Nielson is wrong, so is Kioken. The happy medium is the place where we have to sit and design.

Okay, maybe just a step above the happy medium. That way, forward momentum can continue to carry us. That's kinda important when it comes to a technology such as the web.

So, Zeldman is mostly right as he often is. Look at web safe colors! 216? No one really uses those anymore at all. So, a step has been taken.

"True, there is a huge difference between style and design and yes I believe many web and print artists mistake one for the other. However in lots of cases an interesting style can produce good design.

"I have taken a look at your web site Mr Zeldman. And I'm glad that you are a consultant because you shore can only type a 2 page column. At the look of your web page.

I think it's very ammusing when I hear some people and especially you, from the older generation go on about web design. Oh young people are taking down the industries reputation.

When in fact the top web companies are ran by people under 35. And it's the gap in where the arse falls out of your pants when you make comments like yours, because you clearly can't use or think in a way to use the new software in a dynamic and clever medium. Which your web site clearly lacks.

I have read your article in adobe's column. And I belive that the people who are using wowfull effects are the older generation because they are getting the latest software and seeing they can use a script which makes a logo go around in circles. Just like yourself.

If i can ask you what made you decide and what was the purpose of designing a buttons that rotated on a rollover state? What has this got to do with a consulting service? Absolutly nothing. So when you and the other critics learn how to use new technologies properly then write an article. Practice what you preach and stick to consulting, Because you are clearly behind the 8 ball when it comes to web design.

Have another look at your web site and think, with all you corporate knowledge, Is this how a consulting service, should be represented, with spinning rollovers and cheap looking flash.

"I agree that many design studios in Australia are not embracing the web as another area of design. I am interested to see how so called traditional designers are able to use their skills and experience in this new ecconomy.

I think as problem solvers and creative /logical thinkers we have much to offer this exciting new media. Just as we all had to learn to use computers, we now need to learn new skills in the on-line world or face losing out.

I am interested to talk further about this topic with anyone who is interested.

"now is the time for designers who know the difference between style and design to embrace web technologies or be left behind - taking our industry's reputation with them. how many of our top studios actually offer complete web design services?.

the same considerations required for traditional mediums apply to the internet - unfortunately some designers are ignoring the web and leaving their clients to fend for themselves.

instead of realising the economic benefits of good design, clients are paying inflated prices for 'cool' websites that do nothing for their business. in the mean time designers are missing the opportunity to add value to their clients' design programs and enforce the integrity of the design profession.

"Why single out web designers?

Isn't this something that as an industry we must take responsibility for? - just take a look at the body of work selected for recognition at last year's National AGDA Awards.

If we truly wish to mature as an industry we must encourage work that is shit hot, and not work that just looks shit hot.

"Agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly - unfortunately many of today's web designers design on the latest hardware with the latest tools - my opinion is that many are ignorant of the fact that there is a digital divide, and a large proportion of the public do NOT have access to the latest hardware or fast modems. it is a case of less is actually more for joe public.

Return to Observations

AGDA Members: Discuss this article in AGDA's Business Forum.

andrew@lam-po-tangcom