flavoredthunder
03-06-2003, 06:10 PM
Don't know if anyone has checked out the new macromedia site that launched last night but it got me thinking about a couple issues in user interface design.
The macromedia site is a classic example of redundant navigation gone bad. There are three menu systems on the front page that reproduce in part or whole each other’s content. What is more confusing is that some menus are more extensive then others. For example the drop-down menu can navigate several layers deep while the combo boxes can navigate two levels deep but the top tray navbar can only navigate one level. In an ironic visual twist the larger the area that the menu occupies the fewer pages it has access to. I can only assume that this navbar bonanza is due to a lack of confidence on MACR’s own part. I can only assume they worry that their users will not be smart enough to navigate the site so they must litter the page with buttons. Information architect Edward Tufte stated that people come to the web for content and that your navigation system (flashy as it might be) is not your content. He further stated as a rule of thumb that your navigation should take up 10% of your visual area; any more then that and you have not done your job correctly. The MACR site by contrast takes up 40% of the screen's real estate. When the drop-down menu is opened the menu systems takes up 90% of the screen! That would be like having your site content in a banner ad. In terms of metaphors and user interface standards the MACR site follows some while disregarding others. For example the hierarchical menu system works exactly as you might expect until you try and close it that is. Usually when a user clicks the screen outside the menu, the menu disappears. On the MACR site however, it is possible to open so many drop-downs or pop-ups that menus obscure the entire site!
I do like the colors though!
The macromedia site is a classic example of redundant navigation gone bad. There are three menu systems on the front page that reproduce in part or whole each other’s content. What is more confusing is that some menus are more extensive then others. For example the drop-down menu can navigate several layers deep while the combo boxes can navigate two levels deep but the top tray navbar can only navigate one level. In an ironic visual twist the larger the area that the menu occupies the fewer pages it has access to. I can only assume that this navbar bonanza is due to a lack of confidence on MACR’s own part. I can only assume they worry that their users will not be smart enough to navigate the site so they must litter the page with buttons. Information architect Edward Tufte stated that people come to the web for content and that your navigation system (flashy as it might be) is not your content. He further stated as a rule of thumb that your navigation should take up 10% of your visual area; any more then that and you have not done your job correctly. The MACR site by contrast takes up 40% of the screen's real estate. When the drop-down menu is opened the menu systems takes up 90% of the screen! That would be like having your site content in a banner ad. In terms of metaphors and user interface standards the MACR site follows some while disregarding others. For example the hierarchical menu system works exactly as you might expect until you try and close it that is. Usually when a user clicks the screen outside the menu, the menu disappears. On the MACR site however, it is possible to open so many drop-downs or pop-ups that menus obscure the entire site!
I do like the colors though!