After many years of being on top, Internet Explorer has finally lost the browser race to Firefox. Due to how difficult it is to design/code for, as well as security issues, IE has never been very well-liked among the design community. However, most laypeople with computers in the US today have PCs, which come pre-installed with IE. Due to the availability of IE, it remains an important browser to consider for those that want to reach a wider audience. The good news is that version 8 of IE has become the most popular version, which doesn't have nearly as many problems as 6.
Firefox is the most used browser among those with at least a bit of Internet savvy, however. It's free, has solid code and is customizable with a number of plug-ins and skins. Most websites design for and around Firefox. If you have Firefox, you should have no problem viewing a well-designed site. Unfortunately, in some cases a user can have their Firefox program laden with too many plug-ins and unnecessary toolbars that can threaten the user experience and break even the best layouts.
Google's Chrome browser still only has a small chunk of the total share, but it has been steadily gaining momentum since its release in 2008. It's a very user-friendly and simplistic browser, without a lot of extra bells and whistles that can interfere with the user experience. It is as solid, if not more solid, than Firefox when it comes to defense against viruses and other issues. I expect to see more and more adoption of Chrome in the future, helping to eliminate IE and threaten Firefox's share.
Safari, the standard browser available for Mac, is also a very solid and user-friendly browser (just as Macs tend to be). However, it is very weak defensively and surprisingly easy to hack, despite the reputation of Macs themselves. Since most Mac users tend to be computer-savvy professionals, I believe they end up downloading Firefox immediately upon acquiring their new computers. For this reason, I believe, Safari continues to hold a very small share.
Overall, I feel Firefox continues to be the best browser for its availability, widespread support and solid history. In the future, Chrome might give Firefox a run for it's money, however!
Showing posts with label VISC_210 Web Design. Show all posts
Showing posts with label VISC_210 Web Design. Show all posts
12.07.2010
11.04.2010
Web Typography
In twenty years, web design has come a long way. First we were given images to work with, and then more color choices, and then more font choices... But not many. The problem with using typography in a web page design is that the viewer has to have the font on his or her machine. Your average user doesn't have fancy fonts beside the system fonts their computer came with.
To solve this dilemma, a lot of designers began placing the fonts they wanted to show in images and embedding them into their page layouts. While this approach worked from a visual standpoint, it caused a number of accessibility and SEO issues. Not to mention that if one wanted to copy and paste the information, he or she could not.
So, why not provide the end user with the font so that they could view your design as intended... as it shows on your machine? The easiest and most acceptable option is the "@font-face" command, which allows the CSS to fetch a needed font from somewhere on the server. The problem with this method is that anyone with the knowledge could dig into the server and download the font for himself. In the case of fonts with limited use licenses, this is comparable to theft. There are some font foundries that allow their fonts to be used for free in your designs, but you're still limited in your choices. Also, IE doesn't support the "@font-face" command.
Speaking of Microsoft, they came up with their own solution to the licensing problem by providing some fonts in the "Embedded Open Type (.EOT)" format, which temporarily downloads a font for view on a specified site per machine. Unfortunately, IE is the only browser that supports this method, and many are critical of the restrictive nature of the font usage.
The most widely-accepted method at the moment is to subscribe to font services like Typekit, which allow you use of their font libraries or the option of uploading your own fonts for a monthly fee. This method is the least exploitative of creators of fonts, but the most painful for users of fonts, especially those that can't afford the fees involved.
The future of Web Typography seems to be pretty uncertain. Nobody can come to an agreement on what method is best, and a consensus has to occur before the W3C will endorse that method. I personally feel that if you want to utilize the best fonts, you're going to have to pay in some form or another. A means of uploading and sharing the fonts you've paid to license will probably be the best method that makes everyone happy.
This blog entry is really informative and lists a good batch of links that can help designers explore their options.
To solve this dilemma, a lot of designers began placing the fonts they wanted to show in images and embedding them into their page layouts. While this approach worked from a visual standpoint, it caused a number of accessibility and SEO issues. Not to mention that if one wanted to copy and paste the information, he or she could not.
So, why not provide the end user with the font so that they could view your design as intended... as it shows on your machine? The easiest and most acceptable option is the "@font-face" command, which allows the CSS to fetch a needed font from somewhere on the server. The problem with this method is that anyone with the knowledge could dig into the server and download the font for himself. In the case of fonts with limited use licenses, this is comparable to theft. There are some font foundries that allow their fonts to be used for free in your designs, but you're still limited in your choices. Also, IE doesn't support the "@font-face" command.
Speaking of Microsoft, they came up with their own solution to the licensing problem by providing some fonts in the "Embedded Open Type (.EOT)" format, which temporarily downloads a font for view on a specified site per machine. Unfortunately, IE is the only browser that supports this method, and many are critical of the restrictive nature of the font usage.
The most widely-accepted method at the moment is to subscribe to font services like Typekit, which allow you use of their font libraries or the option of uploading your own fonts for a monthly fee. This method is the least exploitative of creators of fonts, but the most painful for users of fonts, especially those that can't afford the fees involved.
The future of Web Typography seems to be pretty uncertain. Nobody can come to an agreement on what method is best, and a consensus has to occur before the W3C will endorse that method. I personally feel that if you want to utilize the best fonts, you're going to have to pay in some form or another. A means of uploading and sharing the fonts you've paid to license will probably be the best method that makes everyone happy.
This blog entry is really informative and lists a good batch of links that can help designers explore their options.
9.16.2010
Designing with Color
Color is a terribly important thing for a graphic designer to consider. The same is true for a web designer. Certain colors evoke emotions in their viewers, and when one is designing a site, he must consider how he wants the viewer to feel about the product he is presenting. Do you want your viewer to be excited? Do you want your client to be viewed as trendy and young or more mature and responsible?
The Psychology of Color does a great job of explaining the emotions that certain colors are meant to evoke in viewers, and how members of different cultures can view colors differently. Designing for Americans is different from designing for the Chinese, for example. While white evokes purity and cleanness for us, it is also the color of mourning in some countries.
Once you've decided what your primary color is going to be, you need to select other colors to use along with it... Your text, accents and imagery all need to "get along" with your primary color. Colorblender.com has a wonderfully simple tool to help you accomplish this task. By selecting any color on the RGB scale you will be presented with a color blend that you can use to design your site around, complete with Hex Codes.
However, if you don't really understand what the heck a blend is (I had to Google it myself) you can go a more direct route. Color Scheme Designer allows you to take a more proactive approach to your color design by selecting a primary color and finding the accent colors by using the classic rules of complimentary color. You can also see how the colors might come together in a site with just the click of a button. This also provides Hex Codes to help you on your way.
The Psychology of Color does a great job of explaining the emotions that certain colors are meant to evoke in viewers, and how members of different cultures can view colors differently. Designing for Americans is different from designing for the Chinese, for example. While white evokes purity and cleanness for us, it is also the color of mourning in some countries.
Once you've decided what your primary color is going to be, you need to select other colors to use along with it... Your text, accents and imagery all need to "get along" with your primary color. Colorblender.com has a wonderfully simple tool to help you accomplish this task. By selecting any color on the RGB scale you will be presented with a color blend that you can use to design your site around, complete with Hex Codes.
However, if you don't really understand what the heck a blend is (I had to Google it myself) you can go a more direct route. Color Scheme Designer allows you to take a more proactive approach to your color design by selecting a primary color and finding the accent colors by using the classic rules of complimentary color. You can also see how the colors might come together in a site with just the click of a button. This also provides Hex Codes to help you on your way.
8.31.2010
Art Direction on the Web
The newest trend in the graphic design world is "Art Direction" on blog entries/web sites. Unlike, say, this blog, where the entire blog is cohesively designed and every entry follows suit... Each entry gets a unique design that corresponds to the content, like a magazine article would.
This can be observed on Jason Santa Maria's site where each article often receives a completely different color, font and graphic treatment. He brings up good points about how sites can easily mimic print design to add visual interest. Personally, I wondered why it took web designers so long to reach this point. I think that, for a long time, web designers and graphic designers were different creatures. Finally, you are starting to see more people wearing both hats.
My first thought is that, perhaps, web surfers are more fickle and have shorter attention spans. Instead of pretty graphics they want straight information, easily laid out with links clearly visible. However, I then realized that attractive design could easily draw in a reader and keep him there. Unfortunately, from what I've witnessed so far, I think that "Art Directors" are often more concerned with the design aspect of each entry and less about delivery of information. I see big and bold and to the point, but I have yet to really linger on what the text is actually trying to convey. "Okay, this entry's about pencils aaand what is it trying to tell me about pencils? Okay just one paragraph." Why spend all that time designing a page around such a minimal amount of information? I think that design and information need to be married more closely.
I also have a problem with the lack of cohesiveness. With every page being different, there is often little to link a person back to the originating page. I feel that there has to be at least a certain amount of similar elements to keep the entire site and the designer's vision in one place. In most magazines you will often see radical headlines and graphics, but the body text, treatment of columns, etc. still remains the same. You can open a copy of Wired to any page and know that you are reading Wired. With some of these blogs, each page is radically different and the only thing tying you back to the designer is his logo, tucked away in a corner somewhere.
In other words, I feel that this is a promising new direction that needs to be further refined until it becomes as efficient as what we were doing before.
This can be observed on Jason Santa Maria's site where each article often receives a completely different color, font and graphic treatment. He brings up good points about how sites can easily mimic print design to add visual interest. Personally, I wondered why it took web designers so long to reach this point. I think that, for a long time, web designers and graphic designers were different creatures. Finally, you are starting to see more people wearing both hats.
My first thought is that, perhaps, web surfers are more fickle and have shorter attention spans. Instead of pretty graphics they want straight information, easily laid out with links clearly visible. However, I then realized that attractive design could easily draw in a reader and keep him there. Unfortunately, from what I've witnessed so far, I think that "Art Directors" are often more concerned with the design aspect of each entry and less about delivery of information. I see big and bold and to the point, but I have yet to really linger on what the text is actually trying to convey. "Okay, this entry's about pencils aaand what is it trying to tell me about pencils? Okay just one paragraph." Why spend all that time designing a page around such a minimal amount of information? I think that design and information need to be married more closely.
I also have a problem with the lack of cohesiveness. With every page being different, there is often little to link a person back to the originating page. I feel that there has to be at least a certain amount of similar elements to keep the entire site and the designer's vision in one place. In most magazines you will often see radical headlines and graphics, but the body text, treatment of columns, etc. still remains the same. You can open a copy of Wired to any page and know that you are reading Wired. With some of these blogs, each page is radically different and the only thing tying you back to the designer is his logo, tucked away in a corner somewhere.
In other words, I feel that this is a promising new direction that needs to be further refined until it becomes as efficient as what we were doing before.
8.25.2010
My Goals for This Class
Here I am again writing about my goals for the upcoming semester. Looking back at the blog I wrote for last semester, I feel that I definitely accomplished the goals I set forth. I now have a simple yet attractive website, though the coding needs improvement. As I said before, it seems that any Designer worth his paycheck these days has knowledge in Web Design, and I don't want to be left out in the cold. As well, I like being able to represent myself in a professional manner on the Internet.
I would like to tighten up my now pre-existing knowledge of html and CSS, and possibly learn more advanced techniques like Javascript so that I can make my pages more functional on their own without relying on outside scripts. As far as the basic coding goes, I still have a great deal that I need to learn. I managed to float by with a few basic commands and even those only worked for me after lots of sweat and tears! Even then, there are some issues with viewing my website in browsers other than Firefox. Woe!
Though I am seeking a degree in Graphic Design, my true passion is for illustration, and more and more often nowadays you hear about Illustrators being discovered solely on the strength of their online portfolios. I feel if I could have a strong Internet presence, it would do a great deal to advance my career in the right direction.
I would like to tighten up my now pre-existing knowledge of html and CSS, and possibly learn more advanced techniques like Javascript so that I can make my pages more functional on their own without relying on outside scripts. As far as the basic coding goes, I still have a great deal that I need to learn. I managed to float by with a few basic commands and even those only worked for me after lots of sweat and tears! Even then, there are some issues with viewing my website in browsers other than Firefox. Woe!
Though I am seeking a degree in Graphic Design, my true passion is for illustration, and more and more often nowadays you hear about Illustrators being discovered solely on the strength of their online portfolios. I feel if I could have a strong Internet presence, it would do a great deal to advance my career in the right direction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
