3 ms·

I think these sites look very attractive, but this is a very subjective and specific definition of "good". Many of these pages do not finish loading in 3 second

by jxf 3y ago

I think these sites look very attractive, but this is a very subjective and specific definition of "good". Many of these pages do not finish loading in 3 seconds, for example. I'm not sure it would be correct to frame these as "astronomically good" web design.

ben_w 3y ago
The vibe I'm getting is "glossy magazine"… though given I've not actually touched a glossy magazine outside of a waiting room in about a decade, it's entirely possible I'm out of date. Glossy isn't my cup of tea.
- galaxyLogic 3y ago
  These are basically all ads for something. It is like with TV-ads they are "glossy" in their own way, trying to catch the attention to sell something.
- asteroidz 3y ago
  This has always been my feeling about the well-known https://www.awwwards.com/ https://www.awwwards.com/ Would be lying though to say I wasn't inspired by some of the sites they showcase.
sitzkrieg 3y ago
yea this appears to be biased towards design and ui , maybe not even ux on some of the busy ones
Savely 3y ago
Agree. Most of the presented sites are too dynamic for my taste, I don’t like when something on a page moves purposelessly.
lotsofpizza 3y ago
That’s what I’m noticing as well. The content loads, then the content slightly changes once the styling loads and then the additional large sized content loads and then the animations load. So you’re trying to explore the website while everything is constantly resizing, populating along with animations playing all over the place. Also, there is a lot of scroll bar control being taken over. It just feels so limiting to the user to scroll, which I don’t particularly enjoy about modern web design trends. I understand that animations and scroll bar triggered events are great for product release pages, but I just don’t think they’re palpable on a home page.
- galaxyLogic 3y ago
  Why don't they load the CSS first, then HTML, then scripts?
  - FridgeSeal 3y ago
    “Who cares about performance, if our users cared about performance they’d tell us” - PM’s everywhere.

by jxf 3y ago

ben_w 3y ago

The vibe I'm getting is "glossy magazine"… though given I've not actually touched a glossy magazine outside of a waiting room in about a decade, it's entirely possible I'm out of date. Glossy isn't my cup of tea.

galaxyLogic 3y ago
These are basically all ads for something. It is like with TV-ads they are "glossy" in their own way, trying to catch the attention to sell something.
asteroidz 3y ago
This has always been my feeling about the well-known https://www.awwwards.com/ https://www.awwwards.com/ Would be lying though to say I wasn't inspired by some of the sites they showcase.

sitzkrieg 3y ago

yea this appears to be biased towards design and ui , maybe not even ux on some of the busy ones

Savely 3y ago

Agree. Most of the presented sites are too dynamic for my taste, I don’t like when something on a page moves purposelessly.

lotsofpizza 3y ago

That’s what I’m noticing as well. The content loads, then the content slightly changes once the styling loads and then the additional large sized content loads and then the animations load. So you’re trying to explore the website while everything is constantly resizing, populating along with animations playing all over the place. Also, there is a lot of scroll bar control being taken over. It just feels so limiting to the user to scroll, which I don’t particularly enjoy about modern web design trends. I understand that animations and scroll bar triggered events are great for product release pages, but I just don’t think they’re palpable on a home page.

galaxyLogic 3y ago
Why don't they load the CSS first, then HTML, then scripts?
- FridgeSeal 3y ago
  “Who cares about performance, if our users cared about performance they’d tell us” - PM’s everywhere.