• Du HoangDu Hoang, over 9 years ago

    I designed About.com homepage and then bailed (for reasons I rather not say). The homepage was like my first prototype, and it didn't get a chance to developed or fleshed out. It was also responsive, but they took that out for some reason.

    They had to hire a expensive agency to finish the redesign. Their design still looks dated to me, circa 2009.

    8 points
  • Gemma-Lea GoodyerGemma-Lea Goodyer, over 9 years ago

    It's an improvement. But it's still terrible. My eyes can't figure out where to look.

    7 points
  • Account deleted over 9 years ago

    Ugh, why is this not responsive? The type of content (and layout) is ripe for it. I just don't get it.

    5 points
    • Sam Pierce LollaSam Pierce Lolla, over 9 years ago

      Weird, looks responsive to me (Chrome on Nexus 5...)

      0 points
      • Account deleted over 9 years ago

        Hmmm. Maybe our definition of responsive is different? Weird.

        I think a site like this should have responsive content and layout, so that if I narrow the browser (or view on mobile), a column is removed from view and the content itself reorients for the new size. Same with expansion.

        When I view the site in both Safari and Chrome, the overall dimensions seem to shift a little, but the content itself never shifts or moves. If, for example, I make the browser the size of 3 columns instead of 4, the 4th column's content doesn't re-orient itself in its new environment.. its just stands off out of view on the right... accessible only by horizontal scroll.

        0 points
  • Sol RaySol Ray, over 9 years ago

    All I can say is... It's About f?%# time!

    5 points
  • Colm TuiteColm Tuite, over 9 years ago (edited over 9 years ago )

    They've disabled horizontal scrolling, what a horrendous decision!

    So not only is the site not optimised for a single screen resolution below 1280px wide, it actually prevents users from viewing the content at those viewport widths.

    I'm gonna take a wild guess that their development team couldn't figure out why the viewport scrolled horiztonally at 1280px wide, so they just took out the sledge hammer and disabled it without thinking twice.

    Oh yeah btw, the new design is awful.

    2 points
  • Emelyn BakerEmelyn Baker, over 9 years ago

    This homepage has a pretty standard content design: photo, headline, and author.

    Unfortunately, the website doesn't have a great resource of high quality, original images. Opening this homepage to see an endless glut of stock photography really exhausts the eyes, and makes the site seem incredibly spammy.

    Hopefully they can get some good freelance photographers to provide some original content.

    2 points
  • Tom WoodTom Wood, over 9 years ago (edited over 9 years ago )

    Yeah but the actual articles (and by that I mean how they look) still suck.

    2 points
  • Jeannie Huang, over 9 years ago

    This is a great improvement! I remember when about.com used to have this awful page redirect loop back in the 2000's that would force you to stay on their site indefinitely... glad they're considering their users needs a lot more these days.

    2 points
  • Jim SilvermanJim Silverman, over 9 years ago

    it looks like one of those spam link-bait sites.

    1 point
  • Tyson KingsburyTyson Kingsbury, over 9 years ago

    that is a HUGE improvement

    1 point
  • Tony GinesTony Gines, over 9 years ago

    I gave it the 3-second analysis. My findings: it's too noisy.

    0 points
  • Muharrem Senyil, over 9 years ago

    It's just homepage? and it's not responsive? oh my...

    0 points
  • Matt Smadner, over 9 years ago

    perfect example of everything is important / nothing is important. This usually happens when designers are dictated too instead of heard.

    0 points
  • Pete LadaPete Lada, over 9 years ago

    Looks decent. It reminds me a lot of the new digg.com (but with slightly worse design).

    0 points
  • Henrique Alves, over 9 years ago

    I can't figure out what is about.com... really!

    0 points
  • Joe Blau, over 9 years ago

    Looks a lot better. I think there needs to be more of a visual separation between the top section which i guess is showing popular or recent topics and the rest of the page which has individual sections. The <hr> didn't really help me until i started scrolling down and realizing the pattern.

    0 points
  • Cody IddingsCody Iddings, over 9 years ago

    Is it just the homepage and some section pages (technology) that got treatment? Probably a slow rollout.

    I think the font choice is interesting. I think the homepage is very scannable though and pretty good. I like these pages: http://ipad.about.com/od/iPad_Guide/fl/Which-iPad-Should-You-Buy.htm

    but the header is so weird.

    I did a redesign for ChaCha here at DT about 9 months ago that only pieces got rolled out—some company issues there prevented the whole site being launched. Such a fun project and similar problems to deal with here.

    0 points