Shaun Inman’s redesign is ballsy, unexpected, disruptive, intelligent.
I don’t know, a bit dark for me. But there are something in the design that I like. But still, I don’t know.
I find it boring, huge and really hard to read. I’d’say clever, not intelligent.
Why is it when people like Shaun Inman, Dave Shea, Jeffery Zeldman, Cameron Moll etc, do anything we all have to be stop and take note. Due to the fact everyone needs blog about it. I personally have nothing against these professionals but it’s time that field of interface design be more about the variety of designs, exchange of diverse ideas, communication of advances in development than the zombie like following of so called celebs of CSS and web development.
Time to stop the sycophant CSS God worship!
The redesign is neither profound nor inteligent, it at the very least flouts usability and reability rules, through the combination of dark barkground and lack of typography colour contrast. It’s just what it claims to be another incarnation of site, which is certainly not better than the last.
I agree with P. Kayne.
P Kayne nailed it.
The concept is interesting but the execution leaves much to be desired.
I’m left shrugging my shoulders. The old design suffered from an excess of difficult to read pixel text, but it also had some excellent typography (gotta love that DIN) and an interesting UI. The new site has ditched all that in favour of minimalism. Now, I’m all in favour of minimalism where the objective is to not let the structure or presentation get in the way of the content, but at the moment it feels like the minimalism is the content. If the design is successful then it should be able to step back and not get in the way of the reason people visit the site: to read what Shaun writes. At the moment I think the lack of contrast and the slightly pretentious nature of the changing colour schemes (okay, what’s the point of that?) obscure what is generally engaging and interesting content.
“Read me before you judge on aesthetics alone.”
Oh, okay…When I judged on aesthetics alone, I thought “this site sucks”, but now that its value has been explained to me, I guess I was wrong.
...I’ll have to remember to add that little disclaimer to my next design.
What P Kayne said.
Wow Kane nailed it exactly right. If you have to have your visitors need an instruction manual before reading the site, what’s the point?
And of course had I done the exact thing, little me that noone knows about, I’d be a laughing stock to the few people that actually bothered to visit the site. But since this is Inman, some people cant get their noses out of his ass.
Could this be any more useless? From both a useability and a readablility [sic?] approach this site is weak. Poor design stems from poor concepts, no matter how much style you slather on. Inman or no this site is slim.
What the hell has Mr Inman been smoking?
Personally, i think his explanation of ‘The Heap’ sounds a little pompous.
I agree with Kayne and also with Smithy ^.
Who cares if its ‘Shaun Inman’ ? It looks amateur.
Thank goodness someone finally said something. Kudos to P Kayne! I guess the “transition” is close to the end. It’s like a certain designer saying something about WalMart being “ugly”. It stopped being about the prices anymore.
Like I said in that designer’s blog, aesthetics matter to designers at a much much higher degree.
Warm regards all.