February 5, 201412 yr I came across this link last night and I thought it was interesting.... http://uxdesign.smashingmagazine.com/2014/01/27/pragmatic-ux-techniques-for-smarter-websites/ Good Old Smashing Magazine.... What are your thoughts people?
February 5, 201412 yr Couldn't agree more UX and "web design" are really one and the same, they always have been.
February 5, 201412 yr Couldn't agree more UX and "web design" are really one and the same, they always have been. I agree that they both mean the same thing, but only now. I believe that, in web design's developmental years post-millennium, the friendliness and ease-of-use of websites was overshadowed by the sheer need for a website in the first place. Thus meaning that web design meant the pure creation of a site and UX referred to the psychological side of it, but the two never really conjoined. In recent years though, UX design has begun to fall back under the same definition as web design, simply because modern web design carries strict standards and expectations. So creating a good UX design becomes a default process of the web design. I also think it's necessary to give yourself both titles (assuming you're good at both ), because clients need to be made aware that web design isn't about displaying content any which way, and that the psychology of their site will play a huge factor in the overall design. Edited February 5, 201412 yr by throzen
February 5, 201412 yr Interesting, back in the day (1990's/early 2000's) we actually used to concentrate on what is now called "UX" and build sites up "in the browser", the main focus was usability, eg ease if finding information, basic accessibility (identifying links etc), general colour theory and so on. Then when the Photoshop brigade arrived it all went tits up and we found ourselves building out designs of images instead of "real" web sites. Now the wheel has turned full circle!
February 6, 201412 yr Then when the Photoshop brigade arrived it all went tits up and we found ourselves building out designs of images instead of "real" web sites. Indeed. I don't think Adobe ever intended Photoshop to instigate a revolution where the web was built with only design aesthetics in mind as opposed to functionality or browse-ability, but that's definitely what happened! Flash too.
February 6, 201412 yr Adobe stole lots of technology and integrated it into Photoshop. Back in the day Photoshop couldn't even save files as .jpg's (it required a plugin)! At that time software like Paint Shop Pro and Photoimpact were often the "go to" image editors for web designers, and were doing "Save for web..." and proper web image optimisation years before Adobe. It's only when print designers started trying web design did PS ever become a web designers tool, unfortunately it stuck.
February 6, 201412 yr That's interesting - I use Paintshop Pro as a photo editor and I always assumed they had copied Photoshop. I guess they all end up copying bits from each other
February 6, 201412 yr That's interesting - I use Paintshop Pro as a photo editor and I always assumed they had copied Photoshop. I guess they all end up copying bits from each other Well now you know The likes of PSP and Photoimpact were there from the early days innovating and providing great tools for web designers. Adobe however wasn't all that innovative for the web back then, instead going along the route of buying up businesses for their technology instead of creating it themselves, image optimisation nicked from other companies, and the whole Macromedia company which included products like Dreamweaver (code), Flash/Shockwave, Freehand (drawing) and Fireworks to name a few. Even Microsoft had a faily decent image editor at one time which was very web focussed, can't remember what it was called, it didn't really take off!
Create an account or sign in to comment