Tweaking the design
I’m switching up to a warmer color scheme and playing around with getting the lists to look just right in IE7 and IE8. I’m not going to spend time optimizing for IE6, because I’m not sure there is enough value in going through all the hacks required. Well, I’ll get to tweaking my IE6.css file, but it’s not a high priority.
I know IE6 still has a significant user base, but the likely reader of EvanWiener.com is the kind of web surfer that wouldn’t be caught dead using IE6, unless they’re forced to. And even if they are behind a corporate wall, if they’re a web professional, they most likely have access to a better browser.
Next up, new designs for headers and I’ll be designing my first iPhone Home Screen icon.
A designer’s job is never finished
But it is “done” for now. The flexibility of having an open source content managment system is really refreshing. Especially considering how easily it can be updated.
The iPhone WordPress app will really come in handy now.
Redesign time!
EvanWiener.com will be down for the weekend as I make some major upgrades to my portfolio site. There will be delicious Web 2.0 tech, as well as some del.icio.us links.
This will be fun. It’s long over-due.
“Just make it look pretty”
I hear this a lot when others describe what designers do, and I think it would be wise for the design community to actively change the perception of the value that we offer. The context of that description makes design a “nice to have” option for businesses to consider, but also presents design as something that’s not critical to the sales, quality, and functionality of their product.
It’s interesting that we have to struggle to justify our existence to many business people who don’t value what we offer, or refute all attempts at the return on investment good designers can deliver. We also justify our existence by insisting that design could and should lead development, or that we’re not simply a brand police that slows down product development.
We need to articulate our value beyond the impression that design is just a new coat of paint on a perfectly fine working car. Our work should help prevent users from closing the browser in frustration, from closing the tab before clicking “Checkout”, or the potential demo not leading to a buy in. If comparison is done on a nicely designed interface to one that “technically works” but lacks desinger input, the designed one will sell more. Isn’t that worth the cost of design? You’ve wasted hours making a functional application or product that few people want to use, or worse, don’t want to buy. Congratulations, you’re limiting sales potential.
Realtors call it curb appeal and in the newly competitive real estate market with more buyers than sellers, you better make an effort on the quality of your home interior and exterior if you expect to get the price you’re asking for.
It’s why iPod and iPhone users generally have such a good impression of Apple as a brand. The device design invites people to pick it up and use it, with a minimal interface that has less buttons exterior buttons. It’s seemingly simple, but incredibly versatile. I can get more done faster with my iPhone than my old Blackberry, and the experience of buying new content, watching a show or listening to music on my phone is far better for a $200 device, and it’s the design that impresses as much as anything. Now, AT&T just needs to do a better job of getting their system to match Apple’s quality.
It’s time we realized that we don’t simply make things pretty, we add quality.
AOL to Lay Off 10 Percent of Staff, Cutting 700, Due to Ad Meltdown and a Refocusing on New Structure
I finally waned my mother-in-law off of thinking she needed AOL software on her computer to access the internet and e-mail.
They’ve had to reinvent themselves several times since 2000. At this point, I’m surprised it was only 10%. Maybe their plans for mobile web apps will keep the rest of their staff busy.
A favicon is a small logo that appears in your browser’s address bar or tab, and the bookmarks/favorites drop-down menu. Here’s this year’s new multi-color version: Google blogged about how they came to the new favicon here: Here’s the original (still seen in the Firefox toolbar search box): The first change was last year’s little ‘g’: I still think last year’s change was a nice idea. The font has a fun feel to it, but they didn’t match it with the same blue that’s found in the Google logo, for some reason. I’m surprised no one at Google noticed this, if they did, they didn’t care. It’s odd to me that they solicited users for ideas on what Google branding should be. Even though a favicon isn’t a large branding effort, it is for a company so associated with the web. I did find myself doing a double take when I noticed it yesterday, wondering if I was at the right site. That 3-5 second hesitation that I felt was all you need to know about how important brand identity is. Usually companies change brand identity because they want to capture new attention or need a fresh look for a new age. You can’t be too careful about alerting users to new iconography, though, especially when security alerts can be displayed in the same area of a browser (like Firefox 3 does). Even something as small as a 16-pixel image can give the user a small concern, and no company wants that to happen. Update: Looks like the blog Brand New picked up the story. Another blog also mentions similarities with AVG’s favicon.
Google changed their favicon again
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/googles-new-favicon.html
The funny thing is, when you turn the new favicon 90 degrees, the background colors match up in the same sequence as the Windows logo colors.
Pandora and other Internet Radio could be forced to close their virtual doors
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward/2008/08/music_biz_still_trying_to_kill.html
It’s brain-dead what the music industry is doing to itself. They’ve already lost touch with the modern world so much that they’ve marginalized their product to the point where people find no value in owning a copy of it. Making the discovery of, and purchase of, new music less-easy is an ingenious way to flush new-found money down the toilet.
The Internet Radio Equality Act needs to be put in place. Terrestrial radio gets their content for free (thanks to the corporate-owned lobbying they have) for the same content Internet radio and satellite have to pay for.
Watch as illegal avenues of music acquisition become more popular again when outlets like Pandora fall. And those illegal outlets don’t have links to iTunes and Amazon for legal purchasing, nor do they intuitively introduce me to new content I would like. I don’t endorse stealing music as an alternative, but when the system’s as broken and tainted with lobbying corporate interests at heart, and not the artists’, consumers will just turn to whatever’s easiest, regardless or any moral dilemma the recording industry attempts to enlighten them with (which also is a waste of money). Wasn’t this clear years ago, when we saw the Superbowl commercial Pepsi put together to promote their iTunes give-away to the tune of Green Day’s cover of “I Fought the Law, and the Law Won”?
I think if this continues, the musicians are the ones who will suffer most from these actions. They’ll be forced to continue to actually do even more live performances to earn that “Performance Royalty” fee they get every time their music is played because the number of outlets for these “performances” will diminish to the point where they’ll have AM/FM only again, and the only way people will pay to hear music (and the only way performers will get paid) is some Clear Channel or Live Nation event house. Or you’ll see a band 10 years old (or less, at the rate of how quickly musicians become “Yesterday’s News”), playing at your local bar for far less than they ever thought, desperate for the same buck that could have been made if Pandora were still around…
