Hi,

We are in a process of completing our web design and would like to ask your help by voting to your favorite design.

We are developing a SASS service to help Amazon sellers improve their feedback & review rating.
to vote please visit
https://99designs.com/contests/poll/pqqn93

Thanks!

None of them.

 

Many of them look very similar so there isn't much to choose between them. But they all suffer from the same thing: the focus is on the design not the content. The only reason I would be on the site is because I want your product so the first thing I want to see is the features/benefits then how it works and finally how much it costs. A hero image doesn't do any of this.

 

It's as if all the designers have used put together a standard generic theme without any thought about the needs of the potential client.

From a design standpoint the one that seems to be the closest to what you need is probably 106 by A.D.S, great instant call to action, the user experience is pretty good but in places it is a little too commercial for my taste, but that might be the audience you are aiming at.

...great instant call to action...

It's below the fold for me so I didn't see it until I scrolled.

 

There is one top right but that's in the dead zone. Eyetracking tests show people zigzag from top left to the centre of the page, the eyes go to the header infrequently (even less on phone ans tablets).

 

There are plenty of research papers on this but here's a freebie: https://blog.kissmetrics.com/eye-tracking-studies/

Edited December 13, 20169 yr by fisicx

It's not below the fold on my machine, that decision would be down to who usually visits their website I guess, what screen sizes they are using..

 

I'm not sure I would call it a 'dead zone' it's certainly weak but it's not dead and although you are right in general, you are also missing some vital graphic design principles, and that is the contrast is high enough for it not to be missed, yes the "F" eye movement principle is a thing in web design, but this is the point of graphic design, to make things happen that would not ordinarily happen, (like noticing a button on the top right of a website) imo it flickers the corner of your eye enough to be seen even if you don't purposefully look in that direction.

and top right is at the end of the top bar (should check the proper term for that ) of the "F" anyway it's also a popular place for contact and/or search areas so it at least falls under areas that are scanned if not settled on intensively.

 

whe it's a "t" it's a crossbar so guess it would be the same for an "F" (for the upper horizontal) - guess as a print designer i should know this

Edited December 13, 20169 yr by dap

as a potential user i would choose 97- some how seems friendlier, 106 looks vaguely corporate...

as a potential user i would choose 97- some how seems friendlier, 106 looks vaguely corporate...

I used the word 'commercial' but I thought the same thing, I settled for 106 because of the header image, to me it seemed to scream what it needed to in a larger more noticeable way. But as I said before, it would depend on the op's actual target audience, I don't like answering questions like this because of that unless they have been more descriptive about who they are targeting and the impression they want to give for that very reason.. why I don't generally answer any logo 'which is best' or 'which do you like' questions as ultimately, unless you know the company goals and the audience, it's important to give an objective opinion.

It's also difficult to choose a preferred layout because we don't know how they are marketing the service. If their leads already know what the service is (through an advert for example) there is no point in repeating the message. The site can launch straight into the details of the service.

 

With regards the classic F for viewing a site, the preponderance of mobile devices with smaller screens and an expectation of scrolling, the eyes are tending more to look centre then down. User behaviour has changed rapidly in the last year or two.

I agree with most of your first sentence in your reply, but the last part 'if the leads already know what the service is' that is a huge assumption as the visitors could have come from anywhere, not just search engines. It would have been a simple link recommendation, or someone curious about the name of the business, or simply someone who accidentally stumbles upon the site. Also the fact the visited to the site lands on it, and their are pictures that are irrelevant or that do not make it entirely clear what it is they do, most think they have make a mistake and bounce off the site.

 

Second, with mobile devices, again, I believe you are wrong as the 'F' principle applies at ALL times unless you live in a country where text is written the other way or vertical, in those cases it would be backwards etc. The 'F' is how we scan images, we who speak English read from left to right when scanning, there is also a z too http://www.creativebloq.com/ux/how-human-eye-reads-website-111413463

That link is from a 2014 article. Things have changed a lot in two years. I pay for eyetracking tests and the classic F, Z and any other letter of the alphabet isn't generally applicable to mobile devices any more. The eye tends to hover in the lower half of the screen, track up a bit then down again as you scroll. It's a totally different behavior to how people viewed content a year or two ago.

 

My point regards leads is we don't know their marketing campaign. If they are going to do a massive advertising campaign then the landing page is wrong. If they are going to rely on organic traffic from Google then the landing page is wrong. If they are going to rely on referral or affiliate traffic the landing page is probably OK.

 

The design of the site should reflect the marketing strategy for the business (among many other things).

That link is from a 2014 article.

 

You mean like that link you posted? https://blog.kissmetrics.com/eye-tracking-studies/ the earliest comment was posted on Jun 17, 2013, you have said that to me before, Just because it is a few years old, does not mean it is irrelevant, sometimes it just means it has been built upon to include other theories, I happen to know that theory is still as strong now as it was then. the problem is that you are seeing it the perspective of someone who seems very misinformed about design, you have read a lot but out of context and context is important in design, the 'F' was not a principle specifically to web, it is a principle of design, so the fact that we now have mobile does not change anything.

 

My point regards leads is we don't know their marketing campaign. If they are going to do a massive advertising campaign then the landing page is wrong. If they are going to rely on organic traffic from Google then the landing page is wrong. If they are going to rely on referral or affiliate traffic the landing page is probably OK.

 

The design of the site should reflect the marketing strategy for the business (among many other things).

 

I agree with the 'leads', I have used the words 'visitor' but 'leads' is just as good I suppose, I have virtually said the same thing above only in regards to design and not direct marketing.

 

You are making an assumption that they are relying on traffic from google, but as I have already said above, the 'leads' could come from many different sources, any company worth their salt is not going to put their website on google and expect people to just show up, they will be doing lots of other marketing as well. You make a lot of assumptions without looking at the wider implications of those assumptions, you are right we don't know anything about the marketing or the design aims of the website, that is why when I give a response I try to make it as well rounded as possible as a general answer and not a flat one.

 

The design should reflect the marketing strategy, you are right, this is the crossover between marketing and design, but since we know nothing about either (going back to that point) our answers need to be well rounded and our advice not as direct.

You mean like that link you posted? https://blog.kissmetrics.com/eye-tracking-studies/ the earliest comment was posted on Jun 17, 2013

Yes I know, I realised that after you posted your link.

 

We may disagree on all sorts of things here but I expect over a pint we would agree on a lot of things. Very often it's the words I use that get me in trouble. It's like those threads you get where someone asks: 'what's the best way to do X'. There is often no best way, there are just lots of ways of which one one is right for you. and no-one will know if this is right until you test.

 

So going back to the competition here, it's not until launch that feedbacktuner will know if they got it right. And in many cases it's never right first time - very few sites survive without some changes both major and minor.

97 would be great! If I would the user.

I would choose #97 by Cristian_ design.

Best of luck!

I will go with #22 by Peterdraw. The design is very professional, clean and better to go with your services.