Loading ...YOUR Opinion Needed! Indy Redesign
We are revamping our website. We would very much appreciate your feedback on the mockups below so we can take your input on what YOU want to see on our website when you visit.
Please click the images to view a larger version (PDF files) and look at it closely. The images are of the new front page of the website, and the front page showing what the dropdown menus might look like. We’re trying to find the best way to present that TONS of information we have to give you.
So take a minute and tell us what you think by either leaving a comment on this post, or sending an email to webmaster@theindependent.com. Thank you so much for your feedback!
Front page (Click to enlarge):
Front page with menu (Click to enlarge):
September 24th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
I like the bolder brigher colors–actually it’s the same color family, but you’ve used more color. That makes each section pop out better. In fact, I didn’t realize the weather box was right up towards the top on the old one. It’s a definite improvement. I vote yes.
Thanks, Rae
September 24th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
i like the promotion of video content.
It seems a bit crowded overall — lacks a real focus to the page. Think the middle column might look better switched with the left column?
I like the current logo too :]
September 24th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Thanks for the feedback - keep it coming! Chelsea - if we switched those columns, we’d end up with two banners right next to each other (the vertical and the Square/tbone banners) which would be weird too. Also we’d end up with just too many graphics piled onto one side of the page.
We thought giving the news content, center column area a bit of a pop with the lightly shaded/shadowed/beveled edges would make that the most important focus on the page.
September 24th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Plus, we’re still working on the footer area, so you can ignore that bit
We will hopefully move that footer banner down to be inline with the brown box (and that colour will change too) so that will be a little less clutter down there.
September 24th, 2008 at 1:23 pm
This comment came via Twitter - wanted to keep them all in one place for everyone working on this:
I like featuring video/blog/twitter/forums up high, and less going on is good, but I like the original color scheme better. - Thanks @Briannepruitt
September 24th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Steph -
Do you think the crowded feeling Chelsea mentioned could be alleviated a bit by only displaying 3 or 4 titles under each heading to the right of the feature story? The rest of the page has a decent amount of white space, but having 5 titles under each category does cramp that column a bit. Lets mess with the mockup tomorrow and see what it looks like.
Erin
September 25th, 2008 at 7:32 am
I have never been happy with the current design so anything will probably be better.
I am trying to figure out why it is so hard for web based news sevices to treat websites like newspapers and not have ads on the front page.
I would like to add one comment that I hope you will take very seriously. The popup ads you have allowed on the homepage are so annoying that I intentionally will not buy from or use these companies that have the popup ads. They did not popup today…are they finally gone?
I would like to see the classifieds (which did not open for me today) link be more user friendly. IE: I can scan the newspaper and find the area I want very quickly. The last time I searched on the classifieds (which has been prior to your new ownership) it was very tedious and slow.
You are trying to improve and are asking for reader ideas and that is definitely encouraging.
You want an easy forma
September 25th, 2008 at 7:44 am
Thanks for your comments Mr. McCann, we really appreciate yours and everyone’s input as we strive to make our website better.
To answer your questions, the web is a different animal than print. Ads on the first page of a busy website is not unusual and not relegated to just newspapers. Look at all popular websites - the ads are right there on the front pages.
In order to provide a website for readers to access our awesome content, we have to ensure it can make money. Advertisers aren’t going to pay for ads that don’t show up when you load a page. It’s as simple as that.
Having said that, we are definitely looking for ways to make the rich media ads less intrusive.
As for classifieds, that is also an area we’re constantly evolving, and trying new things because ease of use is our main goal. When we switch to our new system, we hope classifieds will be one of the sections that is easier to navigate.
Thanks again for your comments! We’re all reading them and taking them into consideration as we work on this, so your input is incredibly valuable!
September 25th, 2008 at 8:18 am
Don’t make it too nice or might just stop buying the paper!!
September 25th, 2008 at 8:52 am
I think it looks too busy. I like the logo at the top & the lighter colors of the current site.
September 25th, 2008 at 9:47 am
Unless you work at a newspaper you will now know what certain terms are, I think the tabs should say what they are, not what we call them.
Examples:
Features: no one will know what features are.
Photo- should be photo galleries- it makes it sound like there is a lot to see.
Spell out Obituaries; obits kind of sounds disrespectful.
I think the GIPreps sight should be High School Sports- the GI just makes it look like it is for GI schools. Not everyone refers to them as Preps.
Does the privacy policy and copyright info have to be on the top rail if it is also on the bottom? We could use that space for other buttons.
I like how the C banner can be seen peaking above the fold.
Thanks for gathering this info; I am really excited about the changes!
September 25th, 2008 at 10:33 am
Yikes… looks like a busy mess to me!
It’s cluttered with boxes and seems like there is navigation everywhere. I count 24 navigation items in the two bars at the top (Contact Us through Classifieds). I think there needs to be more differentiation between the major navigation (News, Features, Sports, etc…) and the secondary stuff (Contact Us, Copyright…) All that stuff carries the same “weight,” which seems to cause the majority of the clutter. That and the dark background on flag is very weighty…
I don’t see nearly enough news stories without having to scroll. It is also a bit confusing having that column inside the news box… The list of sports stories sits so high that it is competing with the main photo, which is too small. Also, I think the ‘Video’ set of tabs is going to get over-looked… That was the first thing I looked at, because of its top-left positioning, then I skipped past it immediately to get to the lead story. I think many people will develop this as a habit.
I’m wondering who put this together. Usually the web stuff from the Independent is very well designed, as far a basic web page layout principles — where the navigation goes, what flags consist of, readability and so on — this looks like it was done by someone that’s done very little interface design…
Really, the best look I’ve seen for the site was the one before the current one. It had the main stories in tabs on the front and the expandable navigation which were both great features… plus there was that video you could watch right there!
Any reason you guys can’t go back to that?
September 26th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Forget the redesign; cover central nebraska and give us some news rather than regurgitating feel-good press releases
September 30th, 2008 at 7:06 am
I prefer #2, not sure why but it just appeals to me.
October 1st, 2008 at 8:42 am
I don’t like either of the remakes of your front page nor do I like the way it is currently. The page is a cluttered mess and difficult to read with pulldown ads and news items interspersed with advertisement. I know you need ads to help pay for the publication, but pleasssse! Let’s come up with a better design so we can actually read the paper with ease. I often just quite reading the newspaper because of the hodgepodge design of the page.
October 13th, 2008 at 1:09 pm
I am extremely concerned about Gov. Palin’s future son-in-law Levi Johnston, dropping out of high and not registering to vote. What message are we sending to our future generations?
October 15th, 2008 at 7:57 am
I think that it’s a little busy, but better than the current GH nightmare.
It my opinion, drop-downs are not usable and quite annoying. You have the accidental drop or when you are trying to use it and your mouse slightly leaves the edge and causes the drop to disappear.
I prefer a click-to page that presents all that sections information.
I think the color scheme is good, but it’s difficult to tell with that pink banner ad at the top. Granted, banners change and you can’t always control their color or design, but on this mockup, it’s definitely a distraction.
I think the double navs at the top could also be confusing. I think at least one of the will get lost by users.
October 15th, 2008 at 8:35 am
Obviously the current design is horrible, and anything would be better than the Howard-Owens approach to web 1.0–but this isn’t much better, as it is kind of a throwback to 1998. It practically screams, “I am old design, help!” Of course, if you wait a few years, it might be popular again . . . who knows.
Jacob Nielsen has done about 100,000 web-usability studies and has found that people are trained to ignore areas above rectangular page elements–because rectangular page elements are generally ads, and people train themselves to ignore them. This means that your top nav will ignored by about 70% of your readers. Plus, you really don’t need two navigations, that just confuses users.
Drop-downs are also bad, but eckert covered that. Better to make your navs more succinct than have drop-downs. I’ll put it to you this way: each link you add to your site decreases the value and position of the links already there. It’s like inflation, the more money you add to a market, the less each unit of money is worth. If you go to a page with six links, you can easily decide which path to take, and then give your users more options in those areas; however, if you have a page with 60 links, it confuses the user and wastes their time searching the links to find which one they want.
Your search bar is in the upper right-hand corner. Perfect. In studies something like 90% of people look for it there. However, it’s kind of drowned out by the first navigation bar and is really really small. Imagine if someone had a long search they needed to type . . . even the words “Grand Island” wouldn’t fit in that box, and while I realize it will scroll and allow more text, people won’t be able to see half of what they typed. Also, it’s proven that “Search” works better than “Go”, but I realize you are trying to save space.
Now onto the biggie: Cluster F. There is absolutely no focal point here. I have no idea what to look at first, and this is the biggest problem that you have with this page. Even if you have to keep this horrible design, please please please give me a focal point. Give me a large story on the left side of the page or some ajaxy slider that changes stories. I know you want this middle story to be your focus, but it’s not. In Ameraicaland we read left to right, and your current placement will agrivate users . . . including me! I usually check your site about once a week, so help a user out!
Okay, after all that, why don’t you just use the Anthony May design that you had before Gatehouse? As much as I hate that tool, he made a really clean design with good colors and clear usability. Plus most of your other users will remember it and will not have to relearn things. Why reinvent the wheel.
That’s all I’ve got. The sarcasm is free, and I’ll let the normal consulting fee slide because I know you guys like me so much . . . especially Daren.
October 31st, 2008 at 8:52 pm
I think it is ok. As long as it is easy to view the things I like, I’ll like it.I do have one complaint, I like the photos better when it was spotted. I don’t really like the new snap. Its kinda hard to look at things.