W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: An article about Yahoo's simplicity of design

From: Jonathan Chetwynd <jay@peepo.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 17:18:24 -0000
Message-ID: <005501bf6cd8$5ad66900$c9479fd4@signbrowser>
To: "Scott Luebking" <phoenixl@netcom.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I am not quite sure where you got this from however www.google is far
cleaner and the results suit me. try peepo as keyword and compare results.
you might like to consider that some folks actually cannot read and Yahoo is
a real mess for them.
If you care to visit www.peepo.com you will see graphics attempting to
convey information. It is not perfect, nor finished. The first page will
have subject areas similar to yahoo but graphical.
I understand your meaning but it does not take into account the needs of
people with cognitive disabilities

Jonathan Chetwynd
Special needs teacher / web accessibility consultant
education and outreach working group member, web accessibility initiative,
----- Original Message -----
From: Scott Luebking <phoenixl@netcom.com>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2000 3:43 PM
Subject: An article about Yahoo's simplicity of design

> Yahoo as design champion
> David Strom Special to The Daily Yomiuri
> Have you noticed that more and more Web sites are looking like the home
> page of Yahoo these days? What started out as subtle satire
> (naughty.com), then turned into portal envy (Excite, Netscape, Lycos and
> others) now has become a full-fledged Web designer's template
> (word.com). What is going on here?
> Well, the simple and basic reason is that Yahoo's home page is very
> simple and basic. It is easy to navigate, it doesn't take too long to
> load on even the slowest connections, and it just works well. Anyone,
> even my daughter, can grasp what to do and where to go within a few
> seconds of seeing it appear in a browser. Yahoo's home page doesn't have
> much in the way of fancy graphics, has no spinning objects or scrolling
> bars of information or other visual pollution. For the most part, it is
> just text and a few small graphics, and on a plain white background too.
> Word.com's head designer talks about selling out his design principles
> and just going with what the majority of visitors want. In a letter
> posted on their Web site last month, he actually apologizes to his
> readers and his authors (running older browser versions) who were unable
> to view his pages because of his fancy designs and cutting-edge
> technologies. I think this is a historic first and notable for the Web.
> The Web has gone full circle, from a place in 1995 that didn't even
> contain any graphics at all (remember the text-based browsers such as
> Lynx?) to a new visual art medium in 1997 to today's homogenous world
> where text once again is king. And I couldn't be happier.
> I avoid places on the Web that require Shockwave to navigate their sites
> as well as places that put navigation links inside graphics on their
> home pages. Why should I take the time to download this junk when I have
> other, more pressing things to do with my surfing time? So the
> Yahoo-ization of the Web is a good thing, not because I like the Yahoo
> design but because the message of ease of use is finally getting through
> to Web designers. And we will all be better off as a result, since we
> can get to where we want to go without waiting for the graphics to stop
> spinning or scrolling and just be able to concentrate on the text.
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2000 12:20:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:31 UTC