BBC Now Has Beautiful Customizable Website
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
1. The giant module titles are friendly for first timers, but regular users – for whom all these customizable modules were created – are not served at all by them, in fact, they detract from the experience by taking up a lot of space and demanding your focus because they're the LARGEST THINGS on the page.
Check out how Newsvine handles module titles: http://www.newsvine.com/
2. All together the page is a jumble. I understand that they're giving users the power to move things around and possibly make it look bad, but why have it jumbled by default? Also going from module to module there's little consistency: they have completely different layouts.
Check out how msnbc's modules have a consistent structure: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/
3. I can't help feeling like there isn't anything on the page: There is so much chrome. And the gray dividers between modules create a lot of noise. I have to really focus to find the few unordered lists which are the content.
4. Why can I collapse modules? What problem does that solve? If I don't want a module, I will uncheck it. If it's something I don't need often I will move it to the bottom.
I'm sure some will like it, and it's animated (neat!), but I'm not keen on providing two ways to do one thing.
5. Nitpick: I hate when the hover state of buttons is the just gradient reversed: it's lazy and it always throws me because I worry that I accidentally clicked.
(I know this isn't Design News, but a lot of people here are interface designers for at least their own apps, so hopefully someone finds my critique valuable.)
My take: the BBC redesign takes 99% of its ideas from Web Two Point Oh and has never heard of people like, say, Tufte. Thanks, BBC, for updating your site and making it customizable. No thanks for changing the visual style.
And why is there a clock? I already have a clock right there on my screen and it's digital.
Yeah, thats the meaning of beauty I meant.
Where are the recipes when cookery programmes are showing on TV? Where are the playlists when a DJ is spinning tunes? Where are the transcripts for spoken radio?
I like it already.
There's also the fact that the BBC is a broadcaster with schedules, so while you might not care if you know the time, the BBC wants you to know it so that you don't miss broadcasts.
For these reasons I think it's superfluous but in-offensive.
'Karma' does work, though it is just a number.
I don't mean humor in general – which is great if you can include it – but the one-liners, puns, and feigning ignorance jokes.
I don't know. I guess I'm worried about that scenario that plays out all the time where someone puts effort into making a good argument hoping for deserved admiration, but then someone else can come along and crack a simplistic joke and in one second get promoted right past the first guy.
If that scenario plays out it not only discourages valuable discourse, but it encourages the opposite. Jokes are easier than thoughtful comments. So if they're rewarded just as well or better, than people will choose that route.
And a thread full of attempted jokes gets noisy fast.
A high signal/noise ratio is very important for some. I'd bet it's very important for most here. Tokens of information (a post, an article, etc.) often make it to the top of the heap in many user-driven environments simply because they are (1) super-easy to digest and (2) appeal to most. I left digg because that content won out, and then the same with reddit. I don't want to see a funny picture of cats when I come here (I have rss feeds for that), I want articles that are difficult, and comments I have to chew on.