RE: Web evolution, was: RE: Talking about Bandwidth

[Jim Beck]

I quite agree with most of what you said, and am glad you responded. First

of all, I need to clarify what I meant (and i think what Carrie did too) by

"eye candy" - I don't mean stuff like rollovers, graphics, etc. (more on

that later...). I mean sites that are dedicated to art and aesthetics -

sites as Carrie so aptly put - that exist solely to "satisfy the appetite

for art." (that's not an exact quote - what she said was better but

hopefully you get the point). In your post below you write  "...somebody

pushed the technology." my point is that that "somebody" wasn't artists

(unfortunately) - it was business, driven by the quest for money. Hopefully

artists and those of us who appreciate art will also benefit from

technological advances - I think we will. But in my view we won't be driving

the bus.


When I wrote "bland mass-market = $$$" it was my own shorthand for saying

that it is the (mostly) bland mass market's money and will, driving

technological evolution on the web - I would never advocate for bland web

sites of any type be it information, retail, arty, or whatever.


One distinction I believe that must be noted is that artists and designers

are pushing the visual and aural DESIGN of the web - and should continue to

push, hard, in new directions. But it is my view that it is money that

pushes the technology and hardware. Hopefully the technology and hardware

advances of the future will better support the creative visions of artists

on the web.


As far as graphics, rollovers, etc., that's great! Interface design studies

show users like rollovers because it gives 'em just a titch of reassuring

feedback. Anything a designer can do to make users feel relaxed, oriented

and comfortable is a good thing for informational and retail oriented

sites - so it is utilitarian as you pointed out AND arty, hopefully. I'm

sure folks are burned out on this thread, but hey - that's why you get a

message header and a <delete> key. Interesting discussion.


J i m  B e c k

jimbeckalaska [dot] net

H u m a n  S o l u t i o n s

humanspobox [dot] alaska [dot] net

907-746-0228

907-746-0229 fax



-----Original Message-----

From:

ownershocker [dot] com

 [

ownershocker [dot] com]On">mailto:ownershocker [dot] com]On

 Behalf Of Philip

Rink Jr

Sent: Monday, May 25, 1998 10:18 AM

To:

flashershocker [dot] com

Subject: Web evolution, was: RE: Talking about Bandwidth



At 5:53 AM 5/25/98, Jim Beck wrote:

>Unfortunately large, complex (or even small, efficient) art/eye-candy

>sites  will probably always be relegated to the position they are now -

>interesting only for that small group of us who seek them out - but this is

>not what drives technology. Like it or not, money drives technology; bland

>mass-market = $$$.



I think that is too much of a short term view. Just three years ago, many

people were perfectly happy to use a UNIX shell account surfing with Lynx

(me included). I didn't invent multimedia plug-ins and authoring tools, and

I didn't specifically ask for them as a web user. But I'm glad that

somebody pushed the technology, and I'm glad somebody else started building

sites with it. It adds a lot to the Web experience. Compare the

"base-level" web experience today to that of two years ago.


Consider this evolution:

Text links

Graphics as links

Server side image map

Buttons with Javascript rollovers

Each step has required, in fact been enabled by advances in browsers, and

also required more work from the designer, with seemingly only an "eye

candy" justification. Do the buttons do anything different from the text

link? Not really. However, buttons can be made using corporate fonts and

colors, strengthening the corporate identity of the site, and the rollover

action positively identifies the button as a link, adding interactivity

with the user. The obvious extra effort adds professionalism to the site,

and reflects well on the client. These are actual _real benefits_ of

buttons which a year ago may have still been considered "eye candy," and

too much trouble to use. And that's just one small example of "eye candy"

becoming almost a required element of websites.


Web sites are not an all-or-nothing thing -- you don't have to make it

plain text, and you don't have to make it an extravaganza. One of the

reasons that I joined this list was to try to learn how people are using

Flash for practical things, simple ones that aren't "eye candy." But even

so, today's eye candy is tomorrow's basic site. If you think that

bland=money, I think you'll find the money passing you by in a very short

while.


Phil




------------------------------------------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

email to

list-managershocker [dot] com

.  Problems to:

ownershocker [dot] com

N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to

list-managershocker [dot] com

------------------------------------------------------------------------

To UNSUBSCRIBE send: unsubscribe flasher in the body of an

email to

list-managershocker [dot] com

.  Problems to:

ownershocker [dot] com

N.B. Email address must be the same as the one you used to subscribe.

For info on digest mode send: info flasher to

list-managershocker [dot] com