"New" Design Observer

almost 7 years ago from Haik Avanian, Design Director at Big Human

This re-design strikes me as totally insane. How does a site that spends the majority of its time discussing design fail to practice what they preach on so many fronts? The hierarchy is totally unclear, typography illegible, composition confusing and claustrophobic, and there's zero regard for mobile users. Both contributors and readers, not to mention the wonderful content itself, deserve better than this. I'm all for innovating and ignoring existing conventions and best practices, but only if it's because we're moving forward, not back.

http://designobserver.com/

48 comments

Raffaello Sanzio, almost 7 years ago
Is this part of Facebook's experiment to make us feel bad?
25 points
- Trevor Henry, over 6 years ago
  (I wish I could give you more than an upvote right now)
  1 point
Kathy Lu, almost 7 years ago (edited almost 7 years ago )
The type... (Especially the navigation)
15 points
Cory W., almost 7 years ago (edited almost 7 years ago )
Looks like it was designed by a print designer.
I wonder how Erik Spiekermann, one of their contributors, will feel about Archer everywhere.
11 points
- Haik Avanian, almost 7 years ago
  They probably all have to just pretend like it's not happening and not say anything—because, you know—criticism is bad and there is no wrong and everything's just a Ted talk .
  ;)
  4 points
- Weston Vierregger, almost 7 years ago
  This is offensive to print designers.
  10 points
  - Julie Roberts, almost 7 years ago (edited almost 7 years ago )
    agreed.
    0 points
- Amazing Rando, almost 7 years ago
  Looks like it was designed by a print designer.
  This is exactly what I thought when I saw the redesign.
  3 points
- Benjamin Kowalski, almost 7 years ago
  Spiekermann replied to me asking a similar question on twitter:
  https://twitter.com/espiekermann/status/484096858772766721
  0 points
  - Jameson Tyler, almost 7 years ago
    Something by Pentagram? Their web/interactive chops have traditionally been the weakest aspect of their work.
    0 points
Scot Criswell, almost 7 years ago
I completely agree with all the above points. The thing I find most offensive though is the GIANT Mailchimp logo. I mean...I get it, that they sponsor them, but come on!
11 points
- Clark Wimberly, almost 7 years ago
  lol at giving a sponsor that kinda space.
  even if Mailchimp owned this property, they would never make a placement like that. yet for some reason, another brand lets them.
  5 points
  - Maurice Cherry, almost 7 years ago
    It looks like they just changed the logo, but there's still that huge space in the header. I can't get past that toothpaste blue color.
    0 points
David Darnes, almost 7 years ago
Um did anyone else get a dialog window saying "This website abuses rawgit.com. You should complain to its owner." ?
6 points
- Eduardo Nunes, almost 7 years ago (edited almost 7 years ago )
  I did. One would imagine allowing MailChimp to take over 40% of your website's real estate would at least buy you a decent hosting solution, but apparently one would be wrong.
  EDIT: I realize they're actually hotlinking one single github-hosted file. I'm still trying to decide whether that makes it better or worse.
  0 points
  - David Darnes, almost 7 years ago
    Heh, you make a good point.
    0 points
  - David Darnes, almost 7 years ago
    Why are they even doing that? To keep it up to date with the master repo??
    1 point
Paul Macgregor, almost 7 years ago
http://www.fastcodesign.com/3032555/behind-the-scenes-of-the-design-observers-new-look
Article on the new design.
5 points
- Jeremy Stewart, almost 7 years ago
  Design Observer knows it will have it share of critics, but for his part, Bierut feels that that is just par for the course in a world where everyone cares about design. "I'm sure we'll be criticized for continuing to favor a design that is beholden to the legacy of print," Bierut says. "We live in a world where you can't even redesign a logo without a pile-on. But I'm grateful to live in a world where at least now people who are thoughtful will figure out why they hate it."
  Am I wrong in saying that this goes beyond differing opinions on design? The type alone makes this close to (or completely) unusable for many people. Seems to me that on this medium (the web) a disregard for accessibility is unacceptable.
  0 points
Aaron Calzado, almost 7 years ago
It's July—not April.
5 points
Luke Jones, almost 7 years ago
To be honest, it’s not surprising when you look at the contributors.
I went to TYPO Berlin this year. Pretty cool, right? One of the best design conferences on the planet. WRONG.
TYPO Berlin is the most pretentious, underwhelming conferences I’ve been to. I sat in the auditorium listening to people post-rationalise bad design—like the DO site—for hours on end. These people are jaded, out-of-touch, and the majority of them don’t understand digital.
They should stick to type design.
2 points
- jj moi, almost 7 years ago
  i agree. but if those pretentious, jaded, out-of-touch, and the majority of them who don’t understand digital are the target of TYPO and DO, then this design is totally fine.
  0 points
Edvinas Bartkus, almost 7 years ago
And they abuse gitraw.com?! https://www.dropbox.com/s/r0k6no84jvxokoe/Screenshot%202014-07-02%2010.46.21.png
2 points
- Vincent Milliken, almost 7 years ago
  Yeah, what the hell is this?
  0 points
Lucas Morales, almost 7 years ago
I'm pretty insecure with my design skills, but I could do something better than this in 15 minutes.
Probably someone made a good site, and it got feedback and demands from too many people, and it ended up being like this
2 points
Lewis Flude, almost 7 years ago
http://www.eyebleach.me/
2 points
Michael Neff, almost 7 years ago
It feels like a late 90s site viewed in the 2000s, complete with pixel fonts (on a laptop screen that nav is TINY) and scrolling text.
2 points
- Simon O’Shea, almost 7 years ago
  Exactly! I feel like everyone is missing the point of this redesign. It’s clearly retro 90s ;)
  1 point
- Bryant Hughes, almost 7 years ago
  Agreed!
  0 points
Young Phoneix, almost 7 years ago
hard to read in general. why create a line that impedes the content, i felt i had to duck my head to read.
1 point
Sarah Mills, almost 7 years ago (edited almost 7 years ago )
This is breaking my brain—even a print designer would be able to pick an appropriate typeface. I just...I feel like this has to be a test or or practical joke or something.
WHO DOES non-responsive redesigns?!
[edited] Now I am absolutely sure it is a joke/PR stunt. There are just too many subtle design "jokes" going on, and the FastCo article kind of seals it: they know people won't like it, yes it looks like print, and they want people to talk about it. Mission accomplished.
1 point
Sallar Kaboli, almost 7 years ago (edited almost 7 years ago )
No retina support either.
1 point
- Account deleted almost 7 years ago
  :D
  0 points
Floyd Williamson, almost 7 years ago (edited almost 7 years ago )
Hover over the articles. Holy unanimated transitions, batman! Those intro sentences should smoothly slip in and out.
1 point
Rohit Mehta, almost 7 years ago
WTF.. this looks like a practical joke :/
1 point
Moeed Mohammad, almost 7 years ago
Woah, what are we, in 2003? This is just bad.
1 point
John Choura, almost 7 years ago
:(
1 point
Nils Sköld, almost 7 years ago (edited almost 7 years ago )
Marquee aside. The best thing by far on the side is the hidden bar at the top. Which only contains Log in / Register. So worth hiding that behind a click! bravo.
slow clap
0 points
David Hickox, almost 7 years ago
Set the time machine to 2006.
0 points
Jonathan Courtney, almost 7 years ago
I thought my browser was zoomed out. Nope, that font is officially set to: mini.
0 points
James Lane, almost 7 years ago
Try clicking the 'login/register' arrow at the top. Could be ALOT smoother, and so easy to do, but I suppose that's the least of their worries!
0 points
Jonathon Halliwell, almost 7 years ago
That's one tall fixed header...
0 points
Charlie McCulloch, almost 7 years ago
The typography is not illegible. Hard on the eyes for a long article or for scanning the menu, sure, but illegibility is something completely different.
0 points
Louis B, almost 7 years ago
It looks like an old blogspot template? .... Is it?
0 points
Mario Montoya, almost 7 years ago
I get the impression a print designer came up with this.
0 points
Andy Merskin, almost 7 years ago
Whoa... hello Archer used for body copy. :S
0 points
Mike Mulvey, almost 7 years ago
Unfortunate. A missed opportunity.
0 points
Benjamin Kowalski, almost 7 years ago
I totally agree. I don't even see this as a new design. It almost seems as if they've just re-skinned the old website with some new colors and poor typography. Very unfortunate.
0 points

Designer News

Join Us

"New" Design Observer

48 comments

Join Us

Login to Comment

Register Today