Practical Web Design Magazine?
October 26, 2004 | 
56 Comments
Summary: A quick anecdote concerning how the world sees Web design.
The other day at the bookstore I noticed something interesting, disturbing and a bit sad. I had to share. I was looking through the tech magazines and I picked up, and flipped through, a copy of Practical Web Design. A magazine (British I think) that is, supposedly, about, well, practical Web design.
Except it’s not. Not practical and not about Web design.
The primary story was all about creating a Flash game to “drive traffic.” Then there was an article about animation techniques— ‘cause, you know, that’s all Flash is good for. Oh and a bit about “good design with Flash.” I could go on, but I think you get the picture.
Where is the CSS? What about best practices? Standards? Forget it.
There wasn’t even a mention, that I could find, about CSS. Not one. Nothing about XHTML, coding, or Web design theory. And zip about standards. There was very little about usability or accessibility and no mention of any sort of useful basics. I gave it a pretty thorough perusal, and it really was almost all about useless Flash tricks. Obviously this is what sells.
How is a step by step tutorial on how to create a game in Flash practical Web design? I think this underscores a larger issue facing the Web design community. I’m not against Flash in the slightest, but it simply amazes me how many books, classes, and magazines are dedicated to it under the guise of good Web design.
I walked back to the tech section after this and took a look. There was a whole section dedicated to Flash. This section was almost as big as the rest of the stuff dedicated to Web design in general.
No wonder Christian was having trouble finding a contractor who knows CSS. He keeps getting portfolios that showcase nothing but Flash or old school HTML.
Now, I’m not against Flash at all. I think it’s a good skill to have, but I do not think it’s a good place for people to begin their journey with Web design.
It’s just not practical.
Filed under: Web Design
Comments
1. Dan Bowling said:
Well said. Which brings up a question… I live in a very small community that doesn’t have an assortment of web magazines for me to look through and find quality (or unquality) ones. What do you suggest would be worth a special order?
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:05 AM | #
2. Jeremy Flint said:
We used to have a subscription a magazine (British, again) titled CreateOnline. It was a fairly nice mag, covering everything from XML to CSS to Flash and more. They often catered heavily to the Flash crowd, but also had good issues on usability and such.
This magazine was cancelled, and they finished out our subscription with some piece of crap called .net, which was about as elementary as you could get as far as web design goes (creating forms with frontpage webbots!).
I think that the reason there are not really any good magazines about web design is because the state of web design is in such flux and changes so quickly that something published 5 months ago could be considered out of date.
Besides that, there are tons of great sites that are basically web design magazines, just online instead of in print. A List Apart, Digital Web, etc. That, coupled with the fact that nearly every web designer now has a site where they often times openly share information about how the accomplished this or that in a project, has basically meant doom and gloom for many of the print publications that try to focus on web design.
Don’t even get me started on magazines like Print, HOW, and CA trying to do “digital design” issues. They often miss the point entirely.
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:14 AM | #
3. Yvonne Adams said:
I’ve noticed that as well. “Practical” seems to mean “how to do cool stuff without having to actually learn anything.”
In the Santa Fe area, it seems the only people interested in standards are the (relatively few) bloggers. The State of New Mexico sites are mostly worse than what a 13-year old with FrontPage would produce!
It makes it more frustrating to want to leave a job where you’ve finally made some headway re standards, only to have no place to go or anyone to replace you. (note that I’m more of a producer than a graphic designer, which even makes it harder)
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:14 AM | #
4. Keith said:
Dan – To be honest I’ve not seen a good print Web design magazine in ages, if ever. That is, unless you count Design in Flight.
I’ve got no recommendations, aside from that, for you I’m afraid. As much as I love reading magazines and books, I’d be interested in any recommendations people might have as well.
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:16 AM | #
5. Kevin said:
There really are no good print magazines that deal with web design the way we like it. They are either Flash-centric or booged down with 25 tips for Dreamweaver. Essentially, they are driven by software, because theory and design principals don’t buy ad space.
That being said, the first two issues of Design In-Flight (http://www.designinflight.com/) have had some excellent web-related articles on CSS and standards. While the magazine exists in PDF format, it is exceptionally well done and I highly recommend it.
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:16 AM | #
6. Colly said:
As a Brit, I apologise. I know these mags, and they are pretty worthless. Jeremy is right, CreateOnline - or Cre@te or whatever it was - was great. It seemed to keep it’s eye on the changes, and I remember starting to use CSS properly based on a tutorial in there two years back.
We have plenty more rubbish mags - anyone seen Loaded?
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:19 AM | #
7. Peter Parkes said:
I’ve never read Practical Web Design, and was rather keen to get a copy, if only to see how awful it really is.
However, I looked at this list of British magazines with titles starting with P and couldn’t find it; I’ve never seen it in a newsagent either.
Anyone else read it?
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:34 AM | #
8. Arikawa said:
Thanks for the plug, Keith and Kevin.
To be honest, the sad state of design magazines was the reason I wanted to start Design In-Flight. I picked up cre@te a few times myself, and once I got past the ‘cool site of the month’ section, found some interesting things there.
The difficulty – and the irony – is that most of the relevant information for web designers can be found, well, on the web. Yet while print stylesheets can do a lot for making a nice looking printed page, it didn’t quite fit the bill for me when I needed some morning commute reading.
So with the help of contributing writers, such as Keith, we’ve tried to bridge that gap – bringing web writers to a magazine format.
“Practical web design” certainly sounds like anything but.
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:37 AM | #
9. SCIentific said:
I also recommend Design in Flight
as well as MX developer’s Journal
and a brit mag called WebDesigner
(latest issue had a huge section
on accessibility.
Posted on October 26, 2004 10:47 AM | #
10. Sian said:
I gave up on printed magazines a long time ago.
Posted on October 26, 2004 11:07 AM | #
11. Small Paul said:
Surely the web community is far more efficient in creating and distributing good advice and information on web design than any print magazine could ever be?
Plus you get the instant participation and debates, encouraging people to question what they read, and offer up their thoughts to benefit everyone else?
Posted on October 26, 2004 11:10 AM | #
12. Keith said:
Small Paul, etc. – I do think part of the reason why the magazines suck is because there isn’t any viability to focusing on anything outside of tools. Kevin mentioned this as well.
They’re pretty much just big adverts.
However, it’s too bad that there is such a focus on Flash. In books, mags, schools. Flash is great, but let’s face it, it’s kind of a niche program at least for most of us. I’ve had one job where I used Flash alot and looking back it was mostly misguided use.
I still use it, but not on anywhere near an everday basis. I imagine that’s true for most professionals. Sure there are those who will work almost exclusively with Flash, but those don’t seem to be the norm.
Posted on October 26, 2004 11:56 AM | #
13. Ste Grainer said:
Okay, I’m not defending the magazine in question, but did you just look at one issue? Many magazines run themes for each issue, and perhaps (hopefully) the theme for the month you discovered this magazine was Flash. Maybe next month it will be CSS? ;) I know it’s a long shot, and I do agree with you that the practical issues of web design are too easily shunted aside by the Flash-happy mobs.
Posted on October 26, 2004 11:57 AM | #
14. Ste Grainer said:
Oh, I meant to say - in terms of good design magazines, I’ve yet to find a good printed magazine specific to web design, but I adore How magazine. It is a more general design magazine, but it’s engaging and the material is relevant to web designers, too. They also have a contest every year dedicated to interactive design (the next deadline of which is rapidly approaching, I think) - it’s worth checking out if you’re looking for a good trade magazine. I can’t help but read every issue cover to cover. (My only complaint is that there are way too many ads for paper companies in there, and the companies insert ridiculously thick paper to make sure you turn straight to their ad.)
Posted on October 26, 2004 12:07 PM | #
15. Keith said:
Ste – Well, no, you’re right. I didn’t look at another issue of that mag. Not that it makes this issue any less absurd, but yeah, I guess it could be just that issue. No, wait, in the upcoming issue section it’s all Flash too. Come on, you know they’re all the same.
For example, I’m holding in my hand an issue of “Practical Web Pages WEB BUILDER” which seems to almost the same thing with a slightly different name. This was the best one (of about six) that I could find.
The lead story is “Learn how to master SOUND AND VISION” and it talks about how to add video, graphics, animation and music to your Web pages. All very practical.
It’s also got a how-to Flash Game. An online store how to. It does mention CSS, but the “tutorial” is tied to Dreamweaver and not really worth much. There is an article called “Make Your Site Sticky!” – how 1997 is that? It doesn’t look that bad, but…
Anyway, this is the cream of the crop. It’s not all bad, but it’s very dated.
Posted on October 26, 2004 12:14 PM | #
16. Fernando Ferret said:
There’s no problem!
God uses webstandards in His jobs.
Posted on October 26, 2004 12:55 PM | #
17. Geoffrey said:
It’s true, I thumb through those mags at the bookstore and every issue is the same, tired crap every single month. Cre@te Online was the only example of a web design magazine done right that I’ve come across.
Posted on October 26, 2004 01:20 PM | #
18. Joseph Lindsay said:
The magazines are providing what the market (wanabe ‘web designers’) want. The problem is that the market doesn’t realise that’s not what makes a good website.
The same is true of the schools around here. I can go and get what is sold as the ‘cutting edge web design’ qualification, but all that it means is that I was taught what all the menus do in flash and fireworks and how to slice it up into a table.
Posted on October 26, 2004 01:40 PM | #
19. Ray said:
Dan (comment #1),
I see Design In Flight was already suggested (#4) but I thought I’d add my vote of confidence. Design In Flight is Bang On! I doubt you’ll find anything better come short of a book. Well worth the subscription 8 )
Posted on October 26, 2004 02:29 PM | #
20. Dave Marks said:
Another vote here for Design In Flight - i printed it out and it made a refreshing change to being sat in front of my computer.
Good articles etc,a nd worth every penny - damm cheap ;)
I used to read a mag called Internet Magazine (UK mag) which used to have one or two articles worth reading. Never anything anout css/xhtml/accessibilty etc etc. They reformated about a year ago and i haven’t read it since which is a shame
Posted on October 26, 2004 02:51 PM | #
21. Drew McLellan said:
With regard to the issue of tutorials being tied to tools like Dreamweaver, bear in mind that screen shots of code makes for incredibly dull layouts. A tool like Dreamweaver, on the other hand provides enough visual stimulus to entice a user into buying and reading the mag.
That said, yes, many magazines are pretty far removed from the work we undertake as professionals. But then, we’re not the target market. These magazines are mostly for hobbyists.
Posted on October 26, 2004 04:07 PM | #
22. Keith said:
Drew – That’s true, they do seemed targeted more toward DYI folks. But that doesn’t explain how the Flash section in my Barnes & Noble is twice as large as the rest of the Web design section…or does it?
;)
Posted on October 26, 2004 04:14 PM | #
23. Neil said:
How big is the ‘Design in Flight’ magazine download?
I’m tempted, but I’m on a 56K modem - which is pish.
Posted on October 26, 2004 05:03 PM | #
24. jordan gillman said:
Coming from Sydney, Australia I have the same problem. I made the mistake once of buying one of the variously titled Website “Design” mags. And the same story, all about dreamweaver templates, how to put movies and sound in your site, or how to make flash preloaders and the like.
There is nothing available in Australia along the lines of standards based CSS/XHTML development. And even graphic design mags are few and far between, I basically end up purchasing imported copies of idN.
It is fair to say that all the reading I have needed to do has been through the fantastic network of web designers in the blogosphere, and they have been my only source for teaching myself standards based design.
But there is still no replacement for holding a beautifully designed pile of paper in your sweaty little hand…
Posted on October 26, 2004 05:12 PM | #
25. Ray said:
Neil… 3.5 and 5 meg files for the last two issues. Maybe ask if he’d put them in a seperate folder for you to dl at your leisure… late at night ; ) Then it won’t get kicked or timed out with your provider.
Posted on October 26, 2004 06:34 PM | #
26. Dan Bowling said:
Ok, your guy’s word is good enough for me. I just purchased DIF! I can’t wait for my issues!
Posted on October 26, 2004 07:16 PM | #
27. Ray said:
Great! Another sale. Now we can pay the rent this month.
Posted on October 26, 2004 07:27 PM | #
28. Nina said:
I’d definitely like to buy DIF but since the only paying option is through paypal (and paypal suddenly doesn’t recognize my VISA - telling me, that if it’s a valid credit card I should just use another one … haha, sure .. I own millions of credit cards *rolleyes*) I won’t be able to get it :/
Posted on October 27, 2004 12:35 AM | #
29. Paul Nattress said:
Britain has a lot of web design magazines but they are targeted at the “guy-in-a-bedroom-doing-sites-for-his-mate” audience. This is a much larger market than web professionals.
The main problem is that the type of designers who are the target audience for Keith’s website (the CSS designers, web standards designers etc.) are so far ahead of the game than the journalists who are writing for these magazines.
Example: The one magazine which was targeted at the web pros (CreateOnline) had an article that tried to tear apart the idea of using usability in web design but the author had mixed up usability testing with usability design. It got the wrong end of the stick in a big way - so much that it was damaging to the usability battle. This was about a year after usability being the next big thing. CSS and web standards have got a long, long way to go before they get any coverage in these mags. The type of design Keith’s target audience are working on is just too cutting-edge for the mainstream mags.
Best to leave the paper-based magazines alone and get your info from the web.
Posted on October 27, 2004 01:33 AM | #
30. Jim Amos said:
Yeah, hell, I’ve seen some awesome animation work in Flash, but it’s not the most practical use of the internet for the majority of users/developers.
It’s true that you can find nearly everything you need to know about web design online, but I for one still enjoy reading something on paper from time to time. Of course, ‘Design in Flight’ is in PDF format - so we can easily print it out :)
Posted on October 27, 2004 02:23 AM | #
31. Mike Stenhouse said:
I think that you just have to accept that at the moment CSS is still a niche technology. It’s on the way to being mainstream but it’s still very specialised. When people realise they need it and want to learn about it, the magazines will start printing articles.
For right now though Flash is still the rock and roll of the web. If your 16 year old brother wants to learn ‘web stuff’ what’s he going to go for: singing dancing Flash anims or usable, accessible CSS/XHTML? Flash sells, for better or worse. On the bright side, anyone who knows CSS seems to be hot property at the moment. It’s my impression that the big agencies have missed the accessibility boat (with built in wheel-chair ramp) so the few of us out there freelancing are having a whale of a time.
For me, the web community has killed print magazines. I buy design mags but the web ones seem to be aimed at hobbyists. If you hang out on CSS-D you get the latest techniques within minutes of them being discovered… How can a monthly print-run with a 3 month lead-in compete with that?
Posted on October 27, 2004 02:38 AM | #
32. Andy Budd said:
I used to like Cre@te, although it was still very heavily flash focused. Digit is a reasonable Mag covering 3D, DV and the Web. Computer Arts is also good at times.
However there are a huge number of titles like “Practical Web Designer” that are basically a load of tutorials culled from other mags and books, masquerading to be a real publication. They are really aimed at the hobbiest/bedroom designer and really devalue the industry we are in.
Imagine a practical architecture magazine that gave you a double spread, bullet pointed guide on how to create professional blueprints and CAD models or ‘How to build an office block on a budget” for under $500.
I think Flash appeals to people because it’s so easy to pick up and avoids them having to learn any code. It’s also arguably a lot more fun and “creative” which appeals to lots of people who think the web is an entertainment medium rather than an information medium.
On a side note, I contacted a number of British mags a while back with the suggestion of writing some CSS tutorials, but nobody was interested :-(
Posted on October 27, 2004 04:50 AM | #
33. Dan Bowling said:
The fact still remains that the web is stuck in the 90’s. The school I attend (while not a tech school) offers a web page design course, where the students are still being taught the standard Tables, Java, JavaScript and the last day of the class they tell you how you can use CSS in your FONT tag.
How will the web really grow while academic institutions are teaching old and backwards practices?
Posted on October 27, 2004 08:55 AM | #
34. Kevin Tamura said:
I miss Critique, it was the best mag on design.
Posted on October 27, 2004 09:06 AM | #
35. Ray said:
By a small group of focused and dedicated individuals affecting change. WTF knows?
Posted on October 27, 2004 09:31 AM | #
36. Les said:
Your right about academics Dan,
I recently finished a degree in Interactive Media Production at a UK south coast university. Unfortunately the degree should have been called Interactive ‘Macromedia’ Production, as about 3 or 4 out of a class of 50 know anything about HTML and CSS (the course was touted as web oriented). A frightening statistic as these people are now trying to find jobs as Web Designers or similar.
In fact, the majority of the course think that websites are made in Dreamweaver and only hard core programmers touch the HTML. Funny, because the same people made v. complex Flash ActionScript or Director projects in the final year.
It was scary in the interview for the job I now have, when the MD asked what the Uni thought was cutting edge. I almost laughed out loud.
Ray’s right too, it’s the dedicated individuals that help. I stumbled across ALA and then Zeldman, which opened my eyes in the 2nd year of my course. Then sites such as AndyBudd.com, Asterisk and SimpleBits made me see how much better things can be with standards.
As for magazines, I used subscribe to Cre@te and Comp Arts, and have a regular subscription to Digit, but I hardly ever read printed matter anymore - I now have a bookshelf full of books about HTML, Lingo, ActionScript etc, which are all gathering a serious amount of dust. Why? Because my work is in a medium that is changing all the time, and it can provide all the resources to properly learn, and keep up to date - I love this stuff :0)
Posted on October 27, 2004 02:29 PM | #
37. Thomas Cutter said:
I’ve actually come across some cool things in that magazine. Just stupid little things that I never cared to learn on my own. Even the flash projects…
Plus, I guess they have to target it towards people who are beginning web design, which is the majority of the people out there. Of course people who are serious about learning web design and are professionals aren’t going to read magazines like that. They will go straight to the book section.
To me magazines are good for ideas. Books are good for learning.
Posted on October 27, 2004 10:08 PM | #
38. Will Chatham said:
Just when you think Standards are catching on, you talk to a recent college graduate and find out they majored in Frontpage. Metaphoricly speaking, of course.
Because of this post, I started looking up web design courses at places such as www.learningtree.com and www.globalknowledge.com to see how hip they were to standards. While CSS, XHTML, and accessibility were briefly mentioned in a couple of course outlines, nothing about standards was, and things such as java applets and Flash were. By and large they were pushing ‘DHTML’ and what not. Another disappointment.
In regards to magazines, I never assumed anything in print would be worth reading for web design. There was some expensive UK publication they used to have at the local Barnes & Nobel (Digital Arts was it?) that had cool Photoshop plugins on CD, but that was about it.
Posted on October 28, 2004 10:47 AM | #
39. Ben Gremillion said:
As adjunct faculty for a local community college, my department chair asked me to put together a course in Web publishing for the spring. Standards are at the top of my list, along with using Wikis, blogging, and online research (publishing, not just design). Oh, and minor details like grammar/spelling/punctuation.
My question for everyone: If you could present a compelling how-to and (why-to) lecture about using standards, what would you tell your audience? How would you explain the concept and make it sound better than pushbutton “design” in FrontPage or Dreamweaver?
Posted on October 28, 2004 12:39 PM | #
40. Will Chatham said:
Ben:
Don’t even tell them. There is no need to convince them to use standards if you just start teaching that way. Refer to products such as Frontpage as being non-standard, proprietary code generators, and write them off.
Posted on October 28, 2004 12:42 PM | #
41. Eris said:
I will have to second Will’s suggestion.
There’s nothing worse than reading an article or a book where web standards are treated as something that needs to be overly justified against bad coding practices. We’re not taught that the earth is flat just because that used to be the consensus ages ago.
My personal opinion is that those kinds of approaches diminish the validity of good coding practices by making it sound as if they’re just unattainable options that only experts do.
I recently ran across something like that and it bothered me because it seemed so counterproductive. It just makes the most sense to teach to “best practice” and leave it clear and simple like that. We’re not taught that the earth is flat in 1st grade only to be retaught that it’s round in 5th grade. It is just round (or more of an egg-shape), so we’re taught that its round.
(sorry for the bad analogy, that’s all I could think of)
Posted on October 28, 2004 01:12 PM | #
42. Dan Bowling said:
I agree, you need to just teach the standards. Maybe have them read Zeldman’s book, I did the whole thing in a night, they are college students, they can handle it.
Posted on October 29, 2004 09:32 AM | #
43. Vinnie Garcia said:
Teach standards from the get-go. If these kids you’re teaching to are at the beginning stages of web design, they won’t know the difference. Tell them that the W3C validator is a quality assurance tool that can help them fix their work.Posted on October 29, 2004 11:15 AM | #
44. Gary Hartney said:
Excellent article. The thing that dismays me most, going slightly off topic - but maybe not, is that; out of the amount of job adverts I get emailed to me every week about 90% state knowledge of html as a ‘desirable’! Whereas DW, FW, Flash and the rest are ‘essentials’.
I just don’t get it?
Maybe these magazines are just re-enforcing the concept that the packages you can use is the most important indicator of skill level?
Posted on November 28, 2004 11:47 AM | #
45. Jack Smith said:
I think that many of these magazines are created for the sole purpose of making as much money as possible.
They would be likely to market them to the mass market and offer free CDs, which include free trials and bump the price up.
I have found magazines in Britain retailing for around £7.99 containing around 35-50 pages, the main attraction is the CD not the content, yet most of what is on the CD can be downloaded for free off the internet.
Posted on January 25, 2005 09:03 AM | #
46. Craig Grannell said:
To be fair, not all magazines are oblivious to standards, and if they are, it’s generally down to the contributors. I’ve been writing articles about web standards for Broadband and Internet Advisor (formerly Internet Advisor) for about two years now. Every month, there are at least seven pages on web-standards-based web design, and this is for what is supposedly a beginner’s magazine. The likes of Computer Arts, MacUser and more have also been receptive to similar pieces from me.
However, I do agree that many magazines eschew standards, preferring instead to concentrate on obsolete methods. It does help that many magazines are, as someone said on this thread, compiled from older articles from other magazines. I know that my Makeover pieces from Broadband and Internet Advisor get used about six months later in at least one other magazine.
And as for Cre@te Online, I do miss it (it was a fun magazine to write for), but it really jumped the shark near the end, by which time the axe was already falling.
Posted on February 9, 2005 07:38 AM | #
47. Jörgen Broström said:
I saw this mag Practical Web Design the other day, and thought it looked interesting. Off course this was the first time I’ve ever laid eyes on it, and I didn’t have enough time to have a proper look. It seemed to have a couple of interesting articles, one about how to install ZenCart, but the price tag was a bit high for my taste. But now that I read what other people have to say about it, I don’t think I’ll bother spending any money to get it.
Posted on February 16, 2005 11:16 AM | #
48. Michael Littell said:
Damn!…
I’m a web designer/developer located in the states with both a highly technical and highly creative side.  I’ve been doing this for over 7 years, and recently hooked up long term with a major university.
When my boss asked what magazine subscriptions I’d like to get for next year, I immediately thought of the now defunct “Cre@te Online” - now there’s a mag that had engaging and useful articles for both sides of my brain!… is there nothing left that compares?
Posted on March 16, 2005 11:26 AM | #
49. David Restrepo said:
How about Web designer?
It�€™s a British magazine.
Last issue I bought had amazing stuff in it (issue103).
Search engine optimization! & jump up the google rankings!
Special Dreamweaver, flash & Photoshop sections strictly for the web!
The last issue that I bought from Practical Web Projects had an incredible step by step tutorial (with video included on the cd) on how to create web sites using Flash MX 2004 & its new feature of integrating CSS in it so that the content can be updated without generating the SWF file. It was a special issue on Flash though.
The other magazine that I can think of is also British: Computer Arts & has some web related stuff most of the time.
Posted on April 5, 2005 05:43 AM | #
50. Orizu Nwokeji said:
Ahhh Cre@te Online, I still thumb wistfully through my old copies.
However as mentioned earlier the web changes so fast that any product-centric info is quickly outmoded.
I came back to the industry a year ago and the printed matter of greatest value has been concept-centric.
I can’t take Computer Arts seriously apart from as a showcase and Digit is good for software reviews.
If I’m to part with cash I want to read about workflows, pitching, SEO battles, compositional principles, Cocoon 2, accessibility, etc..
Eg create a backend module for Typo3, or customising Zencart…
Posted on May 21, 2005 01:56 PM | #
51. Peter Turner said:
I just bought a copy (April 2005) because it promised “all you need to build great websites” only the feature which I bought it for, to build an online forum, required me to purchase a software program worth 80 pounds stg. I feel totally ripped off. I can do no such thing unless I make the purchase.
Posted on June 8, 2005 03:05 AM | #
52. jbiljr said:
I would like to say that the particular issue you may have picked up was bad. I have been reading the rag for a while and have found it very useful.
I am a CSS and XHTML coder and this months issue was nothing but CSS, XHTML, Wiki creation, site validation and compression, etc. Their first impression on you was pretty bad, however it is my experience that I never pass judgement on first impressions of anything. Give them a chance again, you may find that the mag switches from expertise areas each issue run. I am sure the next one I get will be very Flash heavy and they will follow with one that is blog and JavaScript heavy.
All in all it is a bit expensive for the uncertainty of topic areas, however my company gets my suscription for me; so when it is Flash driven I hand it immediatly to the animators and Flash pros at the office.
Cheers!
Posted on August 26, 2005 01:32 PM | #
53. Danny Weiss said:
I realize this is an old topic, but I just got here, so please forgive me.
Practical Web Design and several other large format magazines apparently part of the same UK publishing family are getting a bad rap here, I think. First, a look at a single issue is rarely fairly representative of the total value of any magazine, and finding an article that is based on buying some piece of software is certainly not unusual in our world.
More importantly, we should keep in mind that this site’s readers may not be the primary target audience for these magazines (including Practical Web Design, Practical Web Pages, and Internet Works, as far as I know). Likewise, some of Myer’s and Zeldman’s books may be useless for readers not yet sufficiently advanced.
I don’t believe there is a conclusive answer to this particular question one way or the other. However, I know I’ve sometimes found articles in these publications of significant value, along with some of the CD-ROMs that are usually pasted on the covers. Then again, I’ve found some articles useless, not unlike the way I perceive Newsweek, Time, the Economist, PC Magazine, the New York Times, or even the National Journal. It really depends on what you are looking for at a given point. Personally, I’d suggest the worst aspect of the particular magazines in question is price: typically running about $15 an issue on US newstands, they cost more than some of the subscriptions most of us probably get and, of course, that cover price significantly raises our expectations. But, then, you don’t have to buy it if a particular issue doesn’t have what you need. And, dare I say it, one can raise the effective benefit to cost ratio considerably by doing their reading in a public library!
Lastly, I think we are all getting a bit spoiled by the availability of sometimes low cost, high quality information available to us on the Internet. Personally, I still have some leanings toward print media, since some of it still has the benefit of greater review and editing.
-Danny.
Posted on September 6, 2005 05:20 PM | #
54. Casey said:
You guys! C’mon man! These magazines aren’t that bad! They are in fact targeted by the “people in the bedroom sitting in front of they’re PC” group, but the reason they’re like that is because those people are the ones that are the majority of the web developers out there.
I’m with you all about the Flash stuff, but I see Flash as being the mainstream of the web in the future because it provides the “stickyness” a website needs to make someone WANT to come back. I myself know a bit about some of the CSS stuff, and since I’m just now starting to be able to see what it’s capable of, I too feel that it’s something that has been neglected for far too long. My only complaint though is that some of you appear to be a bit too critical of what magazines we webbies have out there…
“So don’t put all your weight on the carton because some of us like the few eggs we have left…”
See ya in cyberspace!
Posted on October 23, 2005 02:35 PM | #
55. Oliver Siodmak said:
I have personally been very pleased with the web design & development tips Practical Web Design magazine provides to its readers. Each issue provides readers with information on a number of topics including graphics design, page layout, multimedia development, as well as other constructive evaluation of tools and techniques. While some of the articles do not go into an exhaustive answer to all of my questions I do find that they are a good way to quickly become familiar with some web publishing techniques.
I have been happy with the publication and have recommended it to consultants that are new to web development as a way to learn new techniques. It is not the only source I recommend to them however.
Posted on October 24, 2005 01:11 PM | #
56. Dan Oliver said:
Hi all,
I’m the new editor of Practical Web Design magazine, and read your thoughts with interest :)
We’ve just spent the last few months redesigning the magazine and accompanying CD, and I’d urge you to take another look at the mag. The magazine isn’t aimed at pro developers (we have a mag called .net for pros), but at people that need help creating better sites. We now have 70 pages of tutorials, brand new regulars (including Site Build-Off, where four pro designers take on the same brief), and our CD has been overhauled to include an hour of Lynda.com video tutorials, and two hours of exclusive podcasts every month.
We’ve set up a site at www.pwdmag.co.uk where you can find out a bit more.
Cheers,
Dan
Posted on December 8, 2005 12:55 PM | #
Comments are now closed