Re: backgrounds

Mary Morris (marym@Finesse.COM)
Fri, 30 Aug 1996 18:14:39 -0700


Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 18:14:39 -0700
From: marym@Finesse.COM (Mary Morris)
Message-Id: <199608310114.SAA11230@thyme>
To: wbrooks@trumpet.aix.calpoly.edu, fepotts@fepco.com
Subject: Re: backgrounds
Cc: www-html@w3.org, www-style@w3.org

> On Thu, 29 Aug 1996, David Perrell wrote:
> > > Wouldn't it be nice if you could specify a background as an
> > > animated GIF - and have it work?
>  
> On Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:59:09 -0600, Bill Brooks answered:
> > Wouldn't it be nice if people would use the WWW as a medium for 
> > information exchange, rather than as a high-tech replacement for 
> > television? 
 
F. E. Potts replied: 
> Anything that distracts from my visitors' ability to concentrate on, 
> enjoy, and absorb the content on my site is (IMO) a bad thing.
> 
> it won't be long before all we have is a 2nd-rate
> clone of the worst elements of TV spreading like the blight it is over
> the planet.  Is this what we are all working so hard for, to help the
> advertisers hype their consumer garbage in "cyberspace" just as they
> do everywhere else?  :-(

The best way to respond to this is to prove to business managers
that the bells and whistles defeat the purpose not add to it.
For that we need real statistics. Are there any UI people that
are willing to devise a study to prove the detrimental effects?

If we really had good numbers on this, the media would be all over
this worse than Bob Metcalf's Crash of the Internet or last years
Internet Business Gold Rush Bust. Shall we just sit here and 
complain, or shall we band together and prove statistically that
distractions are detrimental, not beneficial. 

Do realize here that there is already one report that says that
adding Java brings in more money. Although I disagree with the
methodology of the report, it is nonetheless in print.

Mary Morris