1. The giant module titles are friendly for first timers, but regular users – for whom all these customizable modules were created – are not served at all by them, in fact, they detract from the experience by taking up a lot of space and demanding your focus because they're the LARGEST THINGS on the page.
2. All together the page is a jumble. I understand that they're giving users the power to move things around and possibly make it look bad, but why have it jumbled by default? Also going from module to module there's little consistency: they have completely different layouts.
3. I can't help feeling like there isn't anything on the page: There is so much chrome. And the gray dividers between modules create a lot of noise. I have to really focus to find the few unordered lists which are the content.
4. Why can I collapse modules? What problem does that solve? If I don't want a module, I will uncheck it. If it's something I don't need often I will move it to the bottom.
I'm sure some will like it, and it's animated (neat!), but I'm not keen on providing two ways to do one thing.
5. Nitpick: I hate when the hover state of buttons is the just gradient reversed: it's lazy and it always throws me because I worry that I accidentally clicked.
(I know this isn't Design News, but a lot of people here are interface designers for at least their own apps, so hopefully someone finds my critique valuable.)
Agree on 1-4. 5 is probably a non-issue since inverting the gradient is really increasingly common as a hover state "common design is good design".
My take: the BBC redesign takes 99% of its ideas from Web Two Point Oh and has never heard of people like, say, Tufte. Thanks, BBC, for updating your site and making it customizable. No thanks for changing the visual style.
And why is there a clock? I already have a clock right there on my screen and it's digital.
It should integrate in real time with the rest of the BBC's content.
Where are the recipes when cookery programmes are showing on TV? Where are the playlists when a DJ is spinning tunes? Where are the transcripts for spoken radio?
It mystifies me to see clocks on news & customizable websites like this -- the abundance of chrome was mentioned, and I've always thought cute little clocks fall into the same category. It is perhaps "computer administrative junk" or whatever Edward Tufte calls it. Who looks at a clock on a web page to tell the time?
It's certainly chrome, but in the BBC's defense that particular clock has a special place in the hearts of its viewers. It's the one that used to be used in the run up to "Programmes for Schools" broadcasts and is therefore very familiar to everyone of a certain age.
There's also the fact that the BBC is a broadcaster with schedules, so while you might not care if you know the time, the BBC wants you to know it so that you don't miss broadcasts.
For these reasons I think it's superfluous but in-offensive.
I like it, but I can not find anyway to register. I don't want to lose my settings after cleaning the cookies or I would like to have the same options at my home or at work, or whenever I am. 7/10.
I haven't voted you down before, but I've seen some of your jokes. Maybe this is weird, but I'd rather jokes not be made here.
I don't mean humor in general – which is great if you can include it – but the one-liners, puns, and feigning ignorance jokes.
I don't know. I guess I'm worried about that scenario that plays out all the time where someone puts effort into making a good argument hoping for deserved admiration, but then someone else can come along and crack a simplistic joke and in one second get promoted right past the first guy.
If that scenario plays out it not only discourages valuable discourse, but it encourages the opposite. Jokes are easier than thoughtful comments. So if they're rewarded just as well or better, than people will choose that route.
And a thread full of attempted jokes gets noisy fast.
The parent might be seen as draconian, but is actually talking about a good example of vote-for-the-community-you-want. Don't let "el oh el" posts go unmoderated -- If you don't want them here, vote them down. You aren't saying the poster lacks all virtue, just that you'd prefer a meatier discussion that doesn't devolve in to puns being the highest ranked posts.
A high signal/noise ratio is very important for some. I'd bet it's very important for most here. Tokens of information (a post, an article, etc.) often make it to the top of the heap in many user-driven environments simply because they are (1) super-easy to digest and (2) appeal to most. I left digg because that content won out, and then the same with reddit. I don't want to see a funny picture of cats when I come here (I have rss feeds for that), I want articles that are difficult, and comments I have to chew on.
You said "Merely validating doesn't mean that the site is beautiful (read: visually appealing)", but chose your words to make it appear as if you were correcting the original poster.
You both have made valid statements, please try to dig a little deeper when throwing around very general labels like that or you wind up appearing arrogant.
1. The giant module titles are friendly for first timers, but regular users – for whom all these customizable modules were created – are not served at all by them, in fact, they detract from the experience by taking up a lot of space and demanding your focus because they're the LARGEST THINGS on the page.
Check out how Newsvine handles module titles: http://www.newsvine.com/
2. All together the page is a jumble. I understand that they're giving users the power to move things around and possibly make it look bad, but why have it jumbled by default? Also going from module to module there's little consistency: they have completely different layouts.
Check out how msnbc's modules have a consistent structure: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/
3. I can't help feeling like there isn't anything on the page: There is so much chrome. And the gray dividers between modules create a lot of noise. I have to really focus to find the few unordered lists which are the content.
4. Why can I collapse modules? What problem does that solve? If I don't want a module, I will uncheck it. If it's something I don't need often I will move it to the bottom.
I'm sure some will like it, and it's animated (neat!), but I'm not keen on providing two ways to do one thing.
5. Nitpick: I hate when the hover state of buttons is the just gradient reversed: it's lazy and it always throws me because I worry that I accidentally clicked.
(I know this isn't Design News, but a lot of people here are interface designers for at least their own apps, so hopefully someone finds my critique valuable.)