Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Websites, Good and Bad

First off, I had two problems with the issues paper that I mentioned. One was that my paper did not seem very cohesive. The way I fixed this was by rereading it and anywhere it seemed chunky, I changed the wording or added transitions. My second problem was knowing how much research versus how much of my opinion should go into the paper. I didn't really consciously fix this problem. I wrote the paper and, while writing, tried to keep a healthy research/me ratio and I think that it ended up pretty well.

Next, effective vs. ineffective websites. Some websites that I think are effective:
1. https://www.google.com/ Google. It is effective because it is so simple. Type in the clearly marked bar and you're done. It does just what it's supposed to. I also like the simple decoration. It's not too busy.
2. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/ Rottentomatoes. It sets out what it is supposed to do and does it in an easy-to-understand way. I think a website is effective if a person can figure it out without someone else explaining it to them. Rottentomatoes does this. Everything is also conveniently located.
3. http://www.yahoo.com/ Yahoo. The bar on the side leads you anywhere you want to go. The design is nice and gentle (no super bright, eye-hurting colors).
4. http://www.wikipedia.org/ Wikipedia. Another easy to navigate website. It definitely succeeds in its goal at being a universal encyclopedia that regular people can contribute to.

Finding ineffective websites is a lot harder. I chose the effective ones by which websites that I visit a lot, but I'm assuming that I don't really visit ineffective ones. Here are some possibly ineffective websites (found via the delightfully effective Google):

1. http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/archives/sts-108/flash/sts108.swf I can't figure out the purpose of this website (so it probably doesn't accomplish it). The background is also constantly doing this bouncing motion that drives my eyes crazy.
2. http://www.hrodc.com/ Too cluttered. Everything is a link.
3. http://www.creativekidscenter.net/ Colors clash. Also, says it's business was "voted the best of the Northland." What does Northland even mean?
4. http://gandwplumbing.com/pages/947011/index.htm This website has hardly any information at all on the company that it represents. Basically, all it is is a phone number/address.

3 comments:

  1. Wow, I agree that the first website that you have as ineffective is really strange. I think it's also ineffective because you can't do what you want on it. You have to wait around for it to get to the point.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I just got a gray screen when I tried to go to the first ineffective one. So yes, highly ineffective!:)
    I'm also a fan of Google. It is my homepage.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I had the same issue.. with the isssues paper.. haha the whole cohesive thing, mine seemed quite "chunky" as well.that's a good way to fit it. Also, very good websit choices, people typically don't think of the common ones. Gotta love google!

    ReplyDelete