Re: business perspective

>| > Here are a few sites that I am basing my comparison on:
>| > sendmail.com
>| > sun.com
>| > redhat.com
>| > ibm.com
>|
>| I find none of these web sites particularly well-done from a usability
>| point of view. On the contrary, I visited the latter three of them in
>
>I've always liked sendmail.com, but I agree that the latter three are
>not well done.

I don't think it is constructive to say that one site is entirely good or
not. Most every design has aspects that work and aspects that don't. For
example: (standard subjectivity disclaimer here...)

Sendmail.com (home page):
Good
- use of dramatic and striking imagery
- clear, readable, professional logo
- calming color palate with exciting highlights (yellow, light blue, dark
blue, pink, red, black)
- prominent promotion of core competencies ("Rock Solid" internet messaging)
- corporate look and terminology

Poor:
- vague tagline (architects of internet messaging.... shall I call them
if I need a message architect?)
- difficult to read some type (blue on blue, light colors type on light
color background)
- difficult to read buttons (if you want to see the site in German you
need to read size 6 type to adjust button)
- too many navigational options

Overall:
- There is a lot of information to take in, although it is clear they are
targeting "enterprise" type customers and it is not difficult to buy
product or obtain customer support from their site. It is clear to see
that large corporations (IBM) have put their faith in this product and that
the product is actively developed. It seems as if they have made their
navigational options smaller to enable more options, it is hard to read and
unpleasant to look at (the navigation that is).

- - -
postgresql.org (home page)
Good:
- easy to use navigation
- up-to-date information
- interactive navigation (rollover effect)

Poor:
- muted monochromatic color scheme (blue, blue, gray)
- informational glut (about 4 vertical scrolling pages of text)
- no segregation of information; releases, general announcements,
description all together
- inefficient utilization of space (roughly 35% of first screen covered
by large blue and white bars)
- vague section names, "users lounge, developers corner" - I use the
postgresql although I am a developer... where is the documentation again?

Overall:
- If you are familiar with postgresql.org you can quickly go straight to
where you want to go. If you aren't familiar with postgresql.org or
postgresql it may not be clear what it is, although there is plenty of text
to read if you've got some time to kill. It seems to be directed toward
developers. It is unclear who uses postgresql and if it is successful at
what it does. The advertisement for some unrelated products (hotels?
jewelry?) that are displayed on the intermediate "mirrors" are
unprofessional and make it seem like the project is hosted at geocities.

- - -
I hope I don't appear ungrateful to those who have worked hard on
postgreql.org. Obviosly a lot of hard work has gone into it and I
appreciate everything that has been done - I sure have used the site
enough! Design criticism is a part of the design process - if used
constructively it can lead to a dialogue where we can understand better why
a designer made the decisions they have and possibly how a design can be
more effective. It may seem unfair to compare a site which a handful of
people did in their free time to sites developed by firms that worked
solely on a single product with ample compensation. I think the postgresql
community is intelligent and capable enough to be competitive with the
market leaders in more areas than software development.

<- end rant here

-r