Design

I am .00088% of the web design population. Ok, I might be exaggerating in that extrapolation. But not by much. A few months back I particpated in Alistapart’s Web Design Survey. Just released, it reveals what I have long suspected from all the blogs in that sphere that I read. Most of the players are men.

Why is my percentage .00088? I am

• a) female
• b) from Canada
• c) have a master’s degree
• d) of mixed race….

the list goes on. I think that pretty much means I’m in the minority. Quelle surprise! [not mentioned, but e) bilingual:) ]

Girls, where are you?

Google maps vs MapQuest – which one wins the newly invented smooch of the week?

Google Pros

• more fluid
• cleaner, sparser look :: so easier to read

Google cons

• left hand menu a waste of space – but nice to have breathing room

Mapquest pros

• close up view is nice + clear
• send to cell link*

Mapquest cons

• cluttered up with ads, moving ones most irritating graphics too busy :: harder to read
• colours are clunky

Functionally, they offer similar features, but googlemaps has the additional option of a general overview map in lower right-hand corner – whereas the Mapquest options feel like ads. One positive exception – they have a “send to cell” link, and that might be how you’re searching for a place while driving. (*you, being a conscientious driver, are, of course, pulled over to the side of the road, or stopping in for a cup of joe, while calmly figuring out where you are.)

Recommendation: Unless the “send to cell” feature is an over-arching must have feature for you, googlemaps are still a girl’s best friend.

smooches

“Now, you may think IE6 obviously makes browsing the Internet suck because it doesn’t have tabs and tends to implement CSS and JavaScript poorly. But that’s because if you’re reading this site, you’re probably a designer or developer. Remember: ugly, buggy and slow aren’t enough to make users think it sucks enough to switch (think MySpace and Windows). In hindsight, the best thing to happen to Firefox was probably the rise of file sharing networks, spyware and pop-ups. Basically, everything that made the web suck. Everything that made the web a safer place to browse, made Firefox less relevant and quelled the urgency that made an alternative to IE6 a necessity.” From ParticleTree

This was written a few months ago, but no doubt, still applies. I had to laugh out loud when I read this. I have been in this business long enough to remember the halycon days of Netscape 4, and then it’s subsequent fall from grace, and now it’s like a bad echo from some embarrasing incident in college where you found out someone posted the evidence on Facebook – ie6 is here to stay. As opposed to the Netscape 4 days (shudder), I no longer worry so much about how awful something looks in ie6. Why is this? Am I arrogant beyond belief, or stunned, willfully ignoring the 30/35/40/55 % share it still holds?

Nonsense.

• What I do know is this:
  Our clients are a) educated and b) not part of huge institutions where the cost of updating computers is too heavy
• ie7 has been out for about a year now (looks like almost exactly a year as per ms site)
• the problems with ie6 that we have are decorative, not functional. ie (pun intended): it may be that something floats a little too far to the left or right, capriciously; it may be that a menu isn’t aligned perfectly; it may be that the line-height is off.
• but generally speaking, when using css standards and fairly straightforward layout, the problems with ie6 are that it doesn’t display things like a magazine (ie: print) layout would. It dares to digress from our orders. Shame!
• whereas, back in the Netscape4 days (further shuddering), whole pages of text could disappear, or text could be wrangled beyond belief, and that, friends, was a problem.

So, if you’re using ie6, have no fear. You can still see everything we design, even if it occasionally looks a little off. If you want, you can pay us more, and we can hack away until those charming hiccups disappear. Until then, we’ll look forward to ie8?

Hard to believe I just found this out. Nike paid Carolyn Davidson $35 to design their logo, in 1971, when she was a graphic design student. [ – via Creative Latitude  This Carolyn sounds like a rather modest person ].