Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 11th Aug 2005 17:30 UTC, submitted by anonymous
General Development Do you think the pixel is the only unit of measurement for building graphical displays? Come on, you can measure better than that! This article offers tips for user-friendly HTML layout and interface design, and explains why pixels aren't always the best unit for the job.
Thread beginning with comment 17594
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Andre Siegel
Member since:

If web site owner really cared for "graphical presentations" and perfect looks, they would make sure the adverisments displayed would be in sync with the rest of the site's design.

The point of adverts is that you READ them. The only way to make you take notice of them is by looking different from the rest of the website. As studies have shown in the past, the human brain can learn quick how to differentiate between "uninteresting" and "interesting" graphical elements on a website.

The only solution to circumvent the self-learning "advert blocker" in our head is to make banners stand out as much as possible. A minority of people will get frustrated if a banner takes away too much attention. Those people are unlikely to buy from you. (I consider myself part of that group.) For the majority of people, however, annoying banners do work quite well according to marketing studies.

Reply Parent Score: 1

jziegler Member since:

Yeah, I understand how advertisments are supposed to work and still don't like them. I find myself responding more to Google's text-only links than to colour-full blinking beasts.

Interesting, that you replied to my rant, but not to the rest of the points in my post ;) .

Reply Parent Score: 1

Andre Siegel Member since:

Interesting, that you replied to my rant, but not to the rest of the points in my post ;) .

Well, you were stating your subjective experiences. If a website looks bad in YOUR browser, YOU won't buy from this company. There is not much to say about that. It does not contradict what I said in any way.

We were not discussing "broken layout vs. dynamic layout" but "fixed layout vs. dynamic layout". And websites with a fixed layout do not necessarily look bad in your browser. Simple as that.

more often than not I see web sites having more "sophisticated graphical presentations" than information. It's the latter why I browse the web.

And another comment about your subjective experience. This discussion is not really about why *you* browse the web. Have you ever seen a TV advert for parfums? Are there any hard facts in those ads? Is there anything that *you* would consider "information" in those commercials which basically only consist of pure eyecandy and one or two spoken words? (Models, highly stylized scenes at the beach in black/white, etc.)

No? Well, the thing is that millions of people buy parfums because of those type of commercials. There are no hard facts, just pure emotion. The ads either talk to you on a subliminal level or they don't. And all of this is achieved just via visuals.

Of course, this is an extreme example. But it gets the point across quite well. The "homo oeconomicus" does not exist in real life. Emotions play a much bigger role in most people's everyday buying decisions than price information and exact feature comparisons. And this is and must be reflected in web design too.

Reply Parent Score: 1