The sites we researched and found to be innovative are Kaboodle and Stylehive.
Stylehive is more innovative because it integrates elements of MySpace with the interactive concepts of social shopping found in Kaboodle. The main purpose of the site is to allow users to share with others things they found to be fashionable. Stylehive users can personalize their profiles, blog about fashion, and establish their own communities. Like Twitter, users can choose to “follow” others and comment on their profiles.
In Kaboodle users make tons of lists, and if they're social oriented (hot scarves in 2008) then others can use them. Otherwise, you just end up with a hyperlinked shopping list. Kaboodle attempts to foster such a network by creating a leaderboard-type arrangement, called an “A-list,” where the most active Kaboodlers are featured and, as an incentive, given “exclusive deals and discounts!” The first-added tag rewards people for making good finds, and encourages people to be innovative. Users can start a blog based on various themes such as shopping for prom dresses.
Bad points: Users have to add the “Kaboodle” button onto their browser, so they can’t necessarily “kaboodle” everywhere.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Photo Sharing Web Sites
We found Flickr to be the most innovative of the photo sharing Web sites. It is innovative because:
- Site is used by both amateurs and professionals.
- Able to search for photos by place using an interactive map and tag photos by geographic area.
- Comment directly on photos (not just underneath).
- Similar to social networking site; able to have "friends" and join "groups."
- Emphasis on the artistic aspect of photography.
- Easy to use, navigate.
- Difficult to navigate.
- Purpose of site unclear.
- Photos/video are meant to be viewed on mobile technologies. This requires higher-end devices, limiting users to those who can afford it.
- Less organized than Flickr (the homepage was overwhelming).
- Standard commenting (underneath photos).
Who cares about social aggregators
Who cares?
As a group we were underwhelmed and unimpressed by the content of social aggregators.
We didn't see anything innovative about the sites we researched. All of the sites offered the same basic idea and no one site stood out. We also questioned if there is anyone out there who would want to use a social aggregator.
We looked at about a dozen sites and only found one that could be relatively interesting. Profilefly.com combines not only social networks, but also blogs, photo sites, love and dating, and professional profiles.
Video Sharing Sites
For our class assignment, we've explored social media through the video sharing sites below.
Youtube may be the overall leader in video sharing site, but these other sites are popular because they serve different functions:
Hulu This site hosts full length tv shows and has better quality. It also has special news categories including a category called "Election '08" which has all debates and other videos pertaining to presidential campaigns. Vimeo also has a category of HD videos, as well movie excerpts. Everything is organized into categories so videos are easy to search. Vimeo also has comprehensive and accurate information about the video. Television shows are timely uploaded, showing up a day after it was broadcasted on TV. - Nadia
Stickam - People can broadcast themselves live. Most of the radio stations are using them and users can chat with whoever is broadcasting. There are also some people who broadcast themselves playing games. MySpace bought it last year. -Utku
Vimeo Shows videos has a socialization aspect to it because you can have a feed to your videos, you can add friends and have subscribers. Vimeo also has channels allows you to showcase videos with common themes. It also has a category of HD videos and a Vimeo Badge section where you can make a montage of all your videos. Vimeo also allows you to manipulate video, such as making it superslow or superfast for special effects. -Shaleem
Your Truman Show attempts to add social networking to videos, like a mashup between Facebook and Youtube. Features include timelines for connecting video stories, which let people do episodic video storytelling and create social groups around those video threads. The site recently announced a new widget it calls "Video Map" to integrate with Facebook profiles. It's like a video diary where people talk about who they are and their day, hobbies, experiences etc. - Matt.
Veoh is attempting to bring Internet video to TV screens. It's similar to Hulu in that it brings TV to the internet so that people can watch their favorite tv shows when they want to. It's different and innovative from Youtube because they don't have to deal with copyright issues since they get their content legally from the TV networks and studios and they also can have long video formats up to about 40 minutes in length. - Hannah
Youtube may be the overall leader in video sharing site, but these other sites are popular because they serve different functions:
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Effective and Ineffective Representations
1. FredFrap.com
Fred Frap’s homepage as a whole is still very busy. The color scheme was poorly chosen and distracts readers from what is meant to be focused on. I dread this site because my eyes are over-stimulated. Also, the way the information is organized in a floating manner makes the homepage far from user friendly.
2. Yahoo.com
Yahoo’s homepage, on the other hand, is easy on the eyes. It does its best to create clean lines of separation between each section so you can see where everything is located without feeling overwhelmed by the choice of what to click on. This page has much information to offer, yet it does so in a more tasteful way.
Fred Frap’s homepage as a whole is still very busy. The color scheme was poorly chosen and distracts readers from what is meant to be focused on. I dread this site because my eyes are over-stimulated. Also, the way the information is organized in a floating manner makes the homepage far from user friendly.
2. Yahoo.com
Yahoo’s homepage, on the other hand, is easy on the eyes. It does its best to create clean lines of separation between each section so you can see where everything is located without feeling overwhelmed by the choice of what to click on. This page has much information to offer, yet it does so in a more tasteful way.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Good and bad design
I think an example of good design is the old Facebook.com, which was simple in design and didn't have many of the bells and whistles it does today. It was an effective tool for socializing online because there wasn't a bunch of nonsense you had to sort through in order to get to what your friends were trying to say to you. It was a simpler time.
An example of a Web site trying to do too much with its layout would be new Facebook. I think Facebook has gone off their rocker and 99% of the stuff on the site now is worthless. What's up with that map with people in different countries having lines drawn between them? I don't need that. I've been used to the little log-in box being in the same place for the past four years. Why change it up on me now?Facebook: Don't mess with success.
Good v. Bad Designs
The Bad: Creation Museum
This site is an example of bad design because it does not have much of a hierarchy on the page, has no photo (just a background picture), and has hard-to-read text because of all the neon colors. The title of the museum is also broken up into different font sizes, styles and colors, which makes it hard to determine what the name of the museum really is. The rest of the text is simply stacked below the title, without a particular order of importance. And the use of bright colors and shadows is very distracting because it clashes with the background.
The Good: Indian Legal Affairs
This site is an example of a good design because it looks clean, attractive and easy to navigate. Although there are several different colors on the site, they complement one another well and match the colors in the photo on the top of the page. The site also has an air of professionalism and order, which is shown by the descending font size of the titles as you scroll down the page and the menu bar on the left side of the page.
This site is an example of bad design because it does not have much of a hierarchy on the page, has no photo (just a background picture), and has hard-to-read text because of all the neon colors. The title of the museum is also broken up into different font sizes, styles and colors, which makes it hard to determine what the name of the museum really is. The rest of the text is simply stacked below the title, without a particular order of importance. And the use of bright colors and shadows is very distracting because it clashes with the background.
The Good: Indian Legal Affairs
This site is an example of a good design because it looks clean, attractive and easy to navigate. Although there are several different colors on the site, they complement one another well and match the colors in the photo on the top of the page. The site also has an air of professionalism and order, which is shown by the descending font size of the titles as you scroll down the page and the menu bar on the left side of the page.
Good Web Design vs. Bad Web Design
Good Web Design
I think ESPN is an example of a site with good Web design. The site includes a lot of information, but is not overwhelming. The text is black, which keeps it simple, so as not to clash with the photos. Additionally, the site utilizes tabs to link to different sports, which prevents clutter on the home page. Finally, the pictures not only coordinate with the topics on the home page, but they are placed on the page from largest to smallest, which shows importance.
Bad Web Design
An example of bad web design can be found on the Tally-Ho uniforms website. The site is extremely distracting. The flashing ad caught my attention before the title did. The cloud background with planes flying across the page also prevented me from focusing on content. There are too many fonts used and the sizes vary across the page. The designers also went overboard on the use of "special effects." If I were trying to purchase uniforms, I would stay away from this site regardless of the deals they offer because it is entirely too hard to read.
I think ESPN is an example of a site with good Web design. The site includes a lot of information, but is not overwhelming. The text is black, which keeps it simple, so as not to clash with the photos. Additionally, the site utilizes tabs to link to different sports, which prevents clutter on the home page. Finally, the pictures not only coordinate with the topics on the home page, but they are placed on the page from largest to smallest, which shows importance.
Bad Web Design
An example of bad web design can be found on the Tally-Ho uniforms website. The site is extremely distracting. The flashing ad caught my attention before the title did. The cloud background with planes flying across the page also prevented me from focusing on content. There are too many fonts used and the sizes vary across the page. The designers also went overboard on the use of "special effects." If I were trying to purchase uniforms, I would stay away from this site regardless of the deals they offer because it is entirely too hard to read.When Good Web Design Meets Bad Web Design
Good:
Music Web site Pitchfork is a prime example of excellent Web design because the site's elements are unified, simple and in harmony. The site is clean, with similar fonts and colors, as well as a tidy organization. Each section of the site is clearly labeled and slightly different then its neighboring sections, yet there's a unity in fonts, colors and layout. The navigation bar on the left follows from page The site also keeps advertising off the main part of the page, clearly in the margins.
Bad:
Poolesville Online's Web site shows a few flaws in Web design. For one, the site is a bit cluttered, with everything seemingly squeezed into its position. The site attempts harmony with its main stories on the homepage, but ends up making each story look the same, eliminating any sense of prominence. The site's ads change size, oftentimes cutting into editorial content. There's also a running scroll on the main page, which is distracting and serves no real purpose. While there is a navigation bar at the left, the color of it changes, making it somewhat distracting. The page also shifts left or right based on which link you click. Poolesville Online isn't horrible, it just lacks in simplicity, harmony and cleanliness.
Music Web site Pitchfork is a prime example of excellent Web design because the site's elements are unified, simple and in harmony. The site is clean, with similar fonts and colors, as well as a tidy organization. Each section of the site is clearly labeled and slightly different then its neighboring sections, yet there's a unity in fonts, colors and layout. The navigation bar on the left follows from page The site also keeps advertising off the main part of the page, clearly in the margins.
Bad:
Poolesville Online's Web site shows a few flaws in Web design. For one, the site is a bit cluttered, with everything seemingly squeezed into its position. The site attempts harmony with its main stories on the homepage, but ends up making each story look the same, eliminating any sense of prominence. The site's ads change size, oftentimes cutting into editorial content. There's also a running scroll on the main page, which is distracting and serves no real purpose. While there is a navigation bar at the left, the color of it changes, making it somewhat distracting. The page also shifts left or right based on which link you click. Poolesville Online isn't horrible, it just lacks in simplicity, harmony and cleanliness.
Good vs. Bad Design
Good Design:
The Chicago Sun Times, one of Chicago's main newspapers, has a really good webdesign. The main story from the day's paper is usually front and center on the page. It is also easy to navigate through as links to the other sections are at the top. The front page also allows you to scroll down and find an easily accessible list of the columnists that have written today. Besides the one big story, all its pictures and headlines on the front page are not very big, allowing someone looking for a specific story to scroll through without being overwhelmed by one or two story headlines and/or pictures.
Bad Design:
In direct contrast with the Sun Times web design is Chicago's other paper, the Chicago Tribune. While the Tribune usually has the better content, the front page of its website is much harder to navigate. Unlike the Sun Times, its sections are not at the very top, but on the side. It also has much bigger headlines and much bigger photos on the front page, making it overwhleming if one is trying to search for a specific news story. It also has no links that shows which columnists have written recent columns. (you would have to scroll through the entire list of columnists to find out who wrote when.) The front page is also further cluttered by large advertisements. On news stories, the link to change a story to print form is also located at the very bottom of the article, so one has to scroll to the bottom of the article each time he/she wants to print.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
