[thelist] Razorfish sued for bad design.

[aardvark]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver Lineham
>
> >http://www.inside.com/story/Story_Cached/0,2770,6769_10,00.html
> 
> speaking of bad design, why does inside.com 
> insist on using javascript to 
> make links open in a new window - when there's 
> perfectly good (and 
> supported) HTML to do the same thing?

i dunno, maybe razorfish designed it?

if you look at iam.com, you'll notice they use that same approach (which i refer to as elitist 
design)... you can't follow a single link on the front page without it trying to open a new 
window via JavaScript (which is larger than my screen size) or without doing a cookie and 
browser check via JavaScript... why not let me surf at the window size i chose?  and why not 
off-load the browser and cookie check to the server?

without commenting on the validity of the lawsuit, the site *is* pretty damn user unfriendly... it 
won't work in all browsers, it assumes a certain resolution without making it easy for lower 
res users to use the site, and its design is really kinda flaccid...

do i think Razorfish dropped the ball?  yes...

do i think Razorfish is one of the top firms based on quality?  no... just look at their designs of 
late... look at their interfaces in general... look at their source code...

if you hire razorfish because of their name, you get what you deserve... they *do* create some 
fine-looking sites, but technically their work is an abomination that demonstrates a lack of user-
focus or technical skill...

it's those sissy dot-coms who hire them, or the folks who have no clue about the medium... 
they go because of the name, and are wowed by pretty images and flashing logos...

i guess this is my daily rant, but i get frustrated at companies who offer "user-centered design" 
right on their home page, but then do the opposite... to them, user-centered design is centered 
on the users in their offices...