Whats the future of Web design (in your opinion)

[fasterstill]

Now heres one that could throw up some strong opinions :)
Where do you guys think web design is headed?
Do you agree with me that multimedia experiances are needed to improve the interactivity and visual impact for site visitors. I could fully understand the need for quick loading static HTML sites when most people had to contend with 56k dialups but now!
I personal have got to the point that i find it hard to get up in the morning and get the creative juices
going knowing that i have to come up with yet another static flat html site, thats why im moving over to Flash.
I've been dismayed though by the negitive comments i've seen regarding Flash sites and the reasons to qualifly those statments like, SEO rankings.
Since when did Google start telling designers how to design websites. Tail waging the dog so to speak. Surly there job is to write algrithims to find the sites out there not our job to design around them.
Well that should get things started.
Please keep all replys friendly with reasons for your opinions. Im looking for a serious discussion on the future of website design.
Looking forward to your comments.
Thanks

[Faglork]

I think/hope that some day not too far away in the future "web designers" will eventually realize what the "design" in "web design" means, resulting in websites which are actually usefull and useable.

If you (generally spoken, not you personally) are not able to do it in "flat HTML", you are most likely not able to do it in flash either.

And if you have to serve the growing mobile market, you have even more restrictions.

But this is what design is all about: working under constraints.

Making websites work under ALL conditions is the real challenge. It is not whether to use plain HTML or FLASH or WAP or WHATEVER, but to use what is appropriate and serve the right content in the right situation to the right device.

faglork

[fasterstill]

I think/hope that some day not too far away in the future "web designers" will eventually realize what the "design" in "web design" means, resulting in websites which are actually usefull and useable.

OK good start , now lets clear up deffinition for the purpose of this disscussion. Yes i agree that useability has to be the bedrock of the design process but i don't agree that thats where it ends by a long stretch. Maybe it has been up too now given the restictions on bandwidth ect,but now we have the ability to deliver interesting interactive experiances to our customers. If a customer looks at one of my sites and has no reaction except, that works, does what it needs to do then i belive i've missed an opertunity to put a smile on there faces and make the site more memorable.
If car designers stoped at the usabilty point we,ed all be driving 2CVs :)
Remember customers are demanding and get bored with the same old thing.

If you (generally spoken, not you personally) are not able to do it in "flat HTML", you are most likely not able to do it in flash either.

Iagree 100%

And if you have to serve the growing mobile market, you have even more restrictions.

A very good point , and one i'd not realy considered as much as i should have upto now.

[ADAM Web Design]

The problem with your Flash comment as it pertains to Google is that Flash really isn't designed for use as a website creator. It obviously can be done, but it's not the primary use for Flash.

Think about this: what is a flash? It's a sudden burst of light that's here in a second and then gone. An accent. Something designed to attract your attention.

So...if you build a whole site in Flash, your entire site in effect becomes an accent. What's really important in it? What isn't? And therein lies your problem.

I use Flash minimally at best. I use it for things like banners, short intros (when clients ask for them, even when I warn them in advance), inline movies (e.g. the one at www.sustainabilityincubator.com ), but that's it.

The whole point behind my usage of Flash is to draw specific attention to something on the site. In other words, to guide the user's eye.

As far as design goes, I think that it goes beyond more than aesthetics and usability. I think one of the most overlooked and underrated keys to design is web programming. Drawing information from a database; dynamic content generation; templating a layout to allow for quick and easy changes to it; developing functions and procedures which can be reused and therefore speeding up development time; this is a major factor in the future of design.

[Faglork]

Yes i agree that useability has to be the bedrock of the design process but i don't agree that thats where it ends by a long stretch.

It should not "end" there, right. The point is to make feature-rich websites which can *adapt* to the need of the customers/visitors. "Want a full-fledged FLASH version with mega fun factor? Ok, here goes ... oops, you use a Smartphone via GPRS? Here's the perfect version for you ..."

Switchable stylesheets, for example, can go a long way: You can turn a graphically demanding page into an black/white version for the colorblind with one click ...

Maybe it has been up too now given the restictions on bandwidth ect,but now we have the ability to deliver interesting interactive experiances to our customers.

I just watch a competitor take a nose-dive because he is thinking this way ... it depends on your audience. For example, I live in a rural area, with DSL slooooowly catching on and 56k modems still widely in use. If I would employ multimedia, I had to make shure that it would scale down to slow connections and/or offer a static alternative.

On the other hand, if I were located in Berlin and would operate an e-zine for the local PC games clans, I would sure take a different approach ...

If a customer looks at one of my sites and has no reaction except, that works, does what it needs to do then i belive i've missed an opertunity to put a smile on there faces and make the site more memorable.

You job as a designer is to deliver *both*.

If car designers stoped at the usabilty point we,ed all be driving 2CVs :)

Bad example ... years ago I owned one.
Usability? Not much.
Accessibility? Ok, you could load a sofa through the open roof.
Fun factor? Huge. I spent my most memorable holiday trips in a 2CV.
Personality? Mega. In those days, this was the Rolls-Royce for the "green" movement. And it sported some clever design ideas as well. Definitely puts "a smile on your face".

To cut it short. It wasn't very "useable", but had a great "personality". IF usability had been better (heating!! etc.) it would have been a MUCH better car.

From a user's point of view: It failed to deliver in some vital parts.

I now drive a BMW, which is VERY useable, much fun to drive, and has almost cult status (it is an over 20 year old machine which became famous in a German detective TV series).

IF this car had the same usabilty problems like the 2CV, I would not use it. Luckily, it incorporates the best of both worlds: Usability PLUS great personality. Alas, it fails on a third level: It uses a bit too much gas and is expensive (tax-wise).

But this is an OLD design from the eighties, much like the old "1996 old-school designs" found on many websites: "1996" not in terms of "visual design", but in terms of accessibility and/or usability.

And that is all I want to see: Visually compelling, interactive websites which make full use of the web's potential - high-bandwidth elements when *and only when* the device allows it or the visitor wants it. If this is not the case, the website should still deliver, should still work flawless.

A huge task? You bet. But this is *design*. IMHO, I should add ...

faglork

[globalhostinggroup]

well the far futueer will be holo and VR it only natureal that we will end up there one day

[Emark2009]

If a customer looks at one of my sites and has no reaction except, that works, does what it needs to do then i belive i've missed an opertunity to put a smile on there faces and make the site more memorable.

Most customers don't know anything about the internet, they think when things are moving on the screen, it's a good website..

Therefore it is indeed a hard task to convince them of different ideas.
However, if you could give your customer an estimation of the daily revenue he/she could get through that flat-HTML-almost-boring-website, i'm pretty sure that would cause some positive reaction...

Making a website is like writing a business-plan. If it can't convert to sales, you have no business. Come to this point with your customer. If he/she understands, i'm sure Flash isn't an issue anymore.

[Tubby]

Whenever I expain to a designer or programmer what I want, they always overide it with their own opinion.
usually they tell me it cannot be done.

There will be a future for designers, but only the good ones.

[fasterstill]

Whenever I expain to a designer or programmer what I want, they always overide it with their own opinion.
usually they tell me it cannot be done.

There will be a future for designers, but only the good ones.

I think your asking the wrong designers, ANYTHING can be done, it just takes imagination and a bit more hard work :)

[fasterstill]

Gert Leroy
Most customers don't know anything about the internet, they think when things are moving on the screen, it's a good website..Therefore it is indeed a hard task to convince them of different ideas.

Why would you want to change there minds? surly its their choice. If their looking for something more like a TV add and less like a business card/brochure and its applicable to there target audiance then why would you (not you personaly)not do just that?

However, if you could give your customer an estimation of the daily revenue he/she could get through that flat-HTML-almost-boring-website, i'm pretty sure that would cause some positive reaction...

Maybe but id rather spend the extra time and effort working on something a little bit special even if i earn less.

That makes me think? How many of you guys come from programming backgrounds and how many from design/art.
I wonder if the split in opinions is that simple?