21–30 of 38 posts
This is UI madness, things hides, moves and pop around with no obvious relation with my input. The main news timeline is promising though, but greatly needs visual codes for differentiating and qualifying content. It's great to focus on the content while not putting technology asides, but your publishing tool is also of strategical importance. It's great to have rethought the general way of showing information, but t…
I think the UI needs a lot of work. When I think of the future of news, I think of something like Mashable's latest UI (which I personally think is quite beautiful). One comment - when I look at the top bar (side note: the automatic slide is jarring and unnatural IMO), I see titles like "Low Interest Rates". That makes me think of spam/advertisements. Another one: "The Next Crisis"? Again, makes me think of spam. I h…
I don't really see how Mashable's UI is in any way new or different. The same sidebar overdose and jumble of unrelated content thrown together on a page. Maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part, but eventually I think publishers will figure out that simpler is better. (Also see http://dashes.com/anil/2012/08/stop-publishing-web-pages.htm... ) And Quartz, although there's a couple of kinks in their app, is a step…
RE: mashable, to each their own, I personally like the layout; I thought it was pretty simple. 3 columns, more detail as you go left to right.
Though I do agree on the sidebar overdose. I dislike that.
Code might help it get some data, evaluate them, present them in addition to the gist of the story.
But without the plain text, and without emphasis on the plain text, it's not news: it's a lightshow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The animation that makes the header disappear is kind of weird, but what other UI madness are you referring to?
The most annoying is that scrolling can change the article without warning, and scrolling in the opposite direction may or may not return you to the article you actually wanted to read. Maybe it depends on the browser, but I have the same behavior on the Android browser and desktop Firefox.
am I the only person who gets a loading icon and no content? (Chrome 23.0.1271.97 m)
This is UI madness, things hides, moves and pop around with no obvious relation with my input. The main news timeline is promising though, but greatly needs visual codes for differentiating and qualifying content. It's great to focus on the content while not putting technology asides, but your publishing tool is also of strategical importance. It's great to have rethought the general way of showing information, but t…
First, I just stumbled on this and am not affiliated with it. Second, I agree that some parts of the UI are overkill. Keep in mind that it has been designed for tablets and phones though: "(...) built primarily for the devices closest at hand: tablets and mobile phones." The title of this post is taken from the text the link points to. From the text itself: "Developers and journalists, sometimes one-and-the-same, sit…
Another news site that's gone full tilt tablet UI is pandodaily, but at least their site renders correctly and is mostly usable (both not optimally so) for a desktop/laptop user.
Are the costs just too high to support two presentation layers such that shops will bet on mobile/tablet users over all others?
This is UI madness, things hides, moves and pop around with no obvious relation with my input. The main news timeline is promising though, but greatly needs visual codes for differentiating and qualifying content. It's great to focus on the content while not putting technology asides, but your publishing tool is also of strategical importance. It's great to have rethought the general way of showing information, but t…
First, I just stumbled on this and am not affiliated with it. Second, I agree that some parts of the UI are overkill. Keep in mind that it has been designed for tablets and phones though: "(...) built primarily for the devices closest at hand: tablets and mobile phones." The title of this post is taken from the text the link points to. From the text itself: "Developers and journalists, sometimes one-and-the-same, sit…
This actually highlights one of my pet peeves: that web pages need special "mobile enhanced" versions. 90% of the time, a "mobile web page" is just worse than the original. I have to ask: do the guys designing these "mobile" web pages actually use tablets or smartphones? Because what part of "mobile" means "ruin the usability and make sure a lot of awkward javascript-emulated touch gestures are involved"?