Redesign In Progress

September 19, 2005 | 51 Comments

So I’m working on a minor redesign. I’m going to be pushing it through the site in increments as well as making minor changes while I go, so things might be a tad wonky for the next week or so. Feel free to comment away.

(But please keep it on topic, I just had to delete six comments on my last post because they were all off-topic, trollish, or spam.)

The goal of my redesign here is to strip away things that aren’t getting used (by either me or y’all) either enough or as they should. I’m trying to boil down the site, yet again, to what’s most important. It’s actually been quite a bit of thinking that’s gone into what I’ve got so far, even if it might not look that way.

I’ve taken some ideas from a few other sites I’ve been enjoying. So thanks for inspiration goes to Gene Smith, Derek Powazek, and Rundle. I’m glad that people experiment with Web design and report on what works and doesn’t work. And why. It helps a designer is snowed under keep up with things.

Anyway, hope it works a bit better for y’all. So far everyone who’s seen it is very happy. Feel free to comment or ask question in the comments here.

Filed under: News
Keyword Tags: asterisk redesign web+design

Comments

1. Bruno said:

Maybe you can get rid of this intrusive and distracting Google ads. I hate them. Can´t understand why people have them…

Keep up the good work.

Posted on September 19, 2005 09:50 AM | #

2. Keith said:

Bruno – I’m planning on removing a few ads. But not because you hate them. ;0) I’m also going to be reworking them a bit. Hopefully in a way that is less intrusive. I do try to find the best balance between performance of the ads and the experience a reader gets, but it’s hard.

You need to make them somehwat intrusive so people click on them.

Anyway, I’m going to be posting on that subject this week, maybe today.

Why do people have them? People have them because they make money. Plain and simple. They make me enough money to warrant keeping them. They “pay the bills” so to speak. If they didn’t, I wouldn’t have them, so I guess you’re best way to show your dislike for them is to ignore them.

As well, as far as ads go, Google ads seem to best strike the balance between usefulness and intrusiveness. Trust me, there are many, many worse ways I could go.

Posted on September 19, 2005 09:58 AM | #

3. William Stewart said:

I love the new design… It kinda looks like mine! :)

Posted on September 19, 2005 10:40 AM | #

4. Jeremy Flint said:

Looks great Keith.

Posted on September 19, 2005 10:42 AM | #

5. Josh Dura said:

Bruno, how exactly are the ads intrusive? They are below the entry, which if I am not mistaken, is exactly the way they were before?

Keith: Link the graphic in the top right to Home, I keep wanting to click it :)

Posted on September 19, 2005 11:18 AM | #

6. Sean Madden said:

Oooh, content in the footer begins to catch fire. I think it’s a neat use of space and it will be interesting to see how many people adopt it and where it is a few years from now.

Posted on September 19, 2005 12:45 PM | #

7. Keith said:

Josh – I’m, er, working on that. The way I did it I can’t really link it. So, it may be that way until I’ve got time to sort it out. It’s a known issue though…

Sean – I think it’s a great solution myself. But, it’s an experiment, we’ll see how it goes!

Posted on September 19, 2005 12:51 PM | #

8. Jeff Hartman said:

It’s Coudal-ish with a Powazek-ish footer.

Posted on September 19, 2005 01:00 PM | #

9. Jeff Hartman said:

Oh, well look at that. If I read the post I would have seen that you said the footer was inspired by Powazek. Ten points for me for making the connection without reading. 0 points to you for originality. :(

Posted on September 19, 2005 01:04 PM | #

10. Ara Pehlivanian said:

I’m just finishing up a live redesign myself, although you could call it a live design as there was nothing there to begin with.

Either way, it’s looking good so far. I like the way it’s lighter. More pleasant to read. Keep it up!

Posted on September 19, 2005 01:30 PM | #

11. Kevin Tamura said:

The site get more and more minimal with every redesign. I like what you’re doing with the logo too.

One queston: are there always going to be that many entires on the home page? It seemed like allot with the navigation at the bottom.

Can’t wait to see where you take this Keith.

Posted on September 19, 2005 01:30 PM | #

12. Keith said:

Jeff – Thanks for the smarmy comment. Very Troll-ish of you. Take 10 more points.

It’s actually more inspired by Gene’s site. And yeah, it’s not all that original. But it suits my needs which is, IMHO, more important.

As far as Coudal-ish. You must be meaning my old site, which was very Coudal-ish.

Posted on September 19, 2005 01:31 PM | #

13. Keith said:

Kevin – I’m playing with the number of entries on the homepage now. Going to see how I like it now, but I may go back to 3… We’ll see.

Posted on September 19, 2005 01:32 PM | #

14. Carlos Porto said:

Its clean and simple. Your articles stand out more with the right column de-cluttered. I also like the treatmeant on the logo. Although, I’m not sure I like the logo background color for your article headers. Looking forward to the finished product.

Posted on September 19, 2005 01:45 PM | #

15. Scott said:

You know what, Keith, this site kicks ass. Although, I must say I am partial to the old footer you had going on in the previous edition of this site.

Posted on September 19, 2005 01:58 PM | #

16. Keith said:

Carlos – De-clutter is what I was going for.

Scott – Thanks. Yeah, the footer is a also bit of an experiment. We’ll see how it goes.

Posted on September 19, 2005 02:13 PM | #

17. Jeff Hartman said:

Ok, sure that was a bit smarmy. My apologies.

I guess I just expect more from people who are actually designers by trade. There is so much copycat work on the web it’s unbelievable (I’m guilty too, although I don’t claim to be a designer …which still doesn’t mean it’s okay).

I meant Coudal-ish because of the heading typeface, black type on a white background, and a minimalist design. That’s about it.

I really like the image top-right, but I think that is also a pretty typical design style of today (faint diagonal lines, the drop shadow, set at an angle)…it’s like a Doug Bowman’s photo gallery meets Shaun Inman’s Mint.

Posted on September 19, 2005 02:21 PM | #

18. François said:

Except for the annoying Google Ads, it all looks nice to me.

Posted on September 19, 2005 03:07 PM | #

19. Nick said:

I really want to click that top-left graphic for some reason. It should be a home link as mentioned above. :p

Posted on September 19, 2005 03:44 PM | #

20. Nick said:

Uhh, I meant top-right, my bad.

Posted on September 19, 2005 03:45 PM | #

21. Keith said:

Jeff – I think the way you look at things most of the Web is in violation. I’m a Web designer. I go with what works. I think if I were a graphic designer you might have more of a case. Still, I don’t think I’ve “copied” anyone. I’m influenced by lots of folks, just as every other designer is.

Nick – I’ll get that sorted as soon as I can.

Posted on September 19, 2005 05:35 PM | #

22. Ray said:

This “less is more” direction you’re heading in works.

Posted on September 19, 2005 05:37 PM | #

23. Keith said:

Ray – I think so. It’s funny because I used to have a very minimal site, and then I added a bunch of stuff and now I’ve been slowly stripping things away. This really isn’t a ton different from my last site.

Which makes me think more of Jeff’s comment about “typical design style…” The other funny thing about this design is that most of the elements that remain are from my old, old design. I mean, it looks and carries more similarities to my own previous work than to anything else.

In many ways I’m drawing on my self for inspiration more than anyone else. The top right graphic, for example, I had something very similar to that something like 3 years ago on this site. Not sure where there is any real similarity to Mint or Bowman’s work…

Same goes for the color. Last time I checked Coudal wasn’t the first to go minimal with black on *gasp* white text.

My second Asterisk design back in 2001 was much more like this than this is like Coudal…in fact this is very, very similar to that if anyone remembers…

Many of the styles, such as the headings and body text are reminants of previous designs simply reworked a bit. The footer is almost 100% inspired, but I added a bit of my own style. I liked the implementation so I used it.

In any case, it’s not 100% original, but at the same time there is more of my own style in here than anything else. What was old in now new again and all that.

Posted on September 19, 2005 05:53 PM | #

24. Garrett Dimon said:

This is hot man. Nice work. I love it. The footer is pretty sweet as well.

Posted on September 19, 2005 08:04 PM | #

25. Gene said:

Keith, this looks great! I love the footer. :)

Posted on September 19, 2005 08:43 PM | #

26. Kyle said:

Hey, Keith -

Definitely on the right track, I always felt that the articles on your old design were too dense, and that you gave too much real estate to the the right columns.

A couple things, from a user/visitor standpoint, I’d prefer to see the Delicious Links bumped up, above your about you blurb. Definitely above the Dreamhost recommendation. Your delicious links is one of the key reasons I come back to your site as often as I do.

Secondly, I usually recommend to clients that they limit their use of categories, and really think critically before they litter their site with meaningless, or duplicated categories. From an I/A standpoint, I think it would be a good exercise to see if you can scale back to a more concise, focused and meaningful set of categories. Dunno, you’ve probably already thought about it, just noticed cuz your new footer is actually useful. ;-)

Sorry, didn’t mean to harp, I do really like the new design!

Posted on September 19, 2005 09:13 PM | #

27. Keith said:

Gene – Thanks. I was really enjoying what you did with yours. It was the first time I’d seen that “scoreboard” nav on a blog where it clicked that it might be a good way to go. I’ve been a big fan of Flickr’s nav for months now…I just like the clean feel it gives and it helps put the focus back on the content.

Kyle – I’m with you about putting the links before the dreamhost stuff. I’m not sure why I didn’t do that. An oversite. My problem with putting the blurb lower is that the main reason it’s there is for new visitors. I get quite a bit of traffic via Google and I feel it’s very important to set the context.

As far as the categories. I agree with you. It’s a bit muddled right now because I’ve recently moved a bunch of stuff in from other sites, etc. I plan on doing a major rework, but it’ll be a little while.

Posted on September 19, 2005 09:29 PM | #

28. Pierre said:

Hi,

I’ve also got the idea to use tags for my blog post [you have it] but why don’t you make a pool-tag-page where all tags are listed ?
I think tags can be much more effective than a search box, especialy in a blog.
I’m working on a new personnal project that should make intensive use of tags (it’s about music, books, movies, and favorite list ;-))

OH, nice design too ;-)

Posted on September 19, 2005 11:45 PM | #

29. Nick said:

You linked that top graphic, nice. :)

That inline flickr on the homepage is looking pretty slick, btw. Nice implementation.

Posted on September 20, 2005 02:10 AM | #

30. Gordon said:

I like the flickr implementation as well, one question though, how did you get the images so small? Does Flickr do that depending on the number of images you choose to display? Is this the wrong place to ask… ;-)

I go through similar design cycles (redesigning now but not live!) myself. From simple low graphic I progress by adding more graphics, backgrounds etc then… decide to strip it all back again.

However my current re-design is more about how I use my own site (how I write and what I write for it) so it’s been fun thinking along those lines instead of “how pretty can I make it”.

Posted on September 20, 2005 04:03 AM | #

31. Keith said:

Pierre – I’m thinking about doing something along those lines with tags. It might be awhile though, I need to better think it out.

Nick – yeah, took a bit to rework it, but I felt it needed too be done asap.

Gordon – The image size is set by the style sheet. I actually got some help with that a while back from Jeff Croft. You can look at my stylesheet (mess that it is right now) to see how it’s done. Flickr doesn’t really have much to do with it.

Posted on September 20, 2005 07:51 AM | #

32. Gordon said:

So simple it hurts, Keith. Thanks though, I’m trying NOT to copy your design even though I’m in midst of a re-design myself…

Posted on September 20, 2005 08:19 AM | #

33. Jeff Croft said:

This is hot, Keith! I like it a lot!

Posted on September 20, 2005 08:24 AM | #

34. Derek Powazek said:

I think it’s freaking awesome. Nice work!

Posted on September 20, 2005 08:31 AM | #

35. Keith said:

Gordon – Take what works for ya.

Jeff – Thanks bro.

Derek – Thanks for the inspiration. It was your site that got me off my keister to make a change.

Posted on September 20, 2005 09:04 AM | #

36. Jonathan Holst said:

The site looks great :-). I was never a fan of the old one.

But a coding thing; can’t you put a unique ID on this, so I can make a user stylesheet? Just to get rid of Arial :-).

Posted on September 20, 2005 10:35 AM | #

37. Jennifer Grucza said:

Wow! Nice and simple, much lighter than previous versions. If anything, it reminds me of Whitespace in terms of colors and feel, but it is still definitely yours, with the logo and the serif headings.

Posted on September 20, 2005 11:36 AM | #

38. Keith said:

Jonathan – A unique ID on what? The body? I’m not really up on the whole user defined style sheet stuff, but I can look into it.

Posted on September 20, 2005 11:59 AM | #

39. Jonathan Holst said:

Keith, well, you can “just” add a Mike Davidson-like “font switcher”, I just want to view another font than Arial.

And since I won’t force you to switch your chosen font, I’m just asking you to help me do it for you ;-).

Posted on September 20, 2005 02:06 PM | #

40. kirkaracha said:

I think Jonathan’s referring to Eric Meyer’s CSS signatures. If you put your URL into an ID attribute of the body tag (like this: ), Jonathan could specify whatever font he likes for your site (like this: #www-7nights-com {font: 1em Comic Sans, serif;}).

Eric suggests using the site’s URL as the ID, but I don’t see why you couldn’t just use the site’s name.

Posted on September 20, 2005 03:31 PM | #

41. Rick M. said:

Inspired by your live redesign, and Powazek’s excellent ideas about footer design, I’ve joined the party, uninvited. My own live redesign started last night. I am aiming for a 7-day turnaround. We’ll see how clever I can get with the footer. Thanks for the inspiration! Also, In my defense, my site logo was already in the top-right before my redesign. I swear!

Posted on September 20, 2005 06:46 PM | #

42. Keith said:

Rick – Can’t wait to see how it turns out. The logo on the right is a bit of a risk, breaking convention and all that, but I think it works fine. Especially for a creative audience. Good luck!

Posted on September 20, 2005 07:00 PM | #

43. Paul said:

I like the info bar at the bottom.

Derek’s article this week really hit the mark with me. I’d like to do something like that with my site. I’ve been trying to figure out a good way to present my resume/discography/work info, seeing I’m a musician, and I’ve been mulling over Derek’s suggestion. I could see the “bottom” being used in quite a few different ways.

Looks great, Keith, but then, your various tweaks and redesigns have always been downright tasty!

Posted on September 20, 2005 10:29 PM | #

44. Jeroen Coumans said:

Very cool, I love the minimalistic look (I’m in that phase myself as well ;). And I’m betting that the enhanced footer will be the new dropshadow this fall. Just one suggestion: I think your footer could be improved by integrating your (now MIA) main navigation.

Posted on September 21, 2005 08:39 AM | #

45. Keith said:

Jeroen – That’s one of the things I removed. The main nav. Those pages pretty much don’t exisit anymore. I mean, they do, but they’re not toplevel pages really.

I realize this is strange, but I really think it suits the site better.

Posted on September 21, 2005 10:28 AM | #

46. Sally said:

This is by far the coolest I’ve seen for a while.

Posted on September 21, 2005 11:32 AM | #

47. Joseph Wain said:

You whippersnappers and your putting stuff on the bottom of the page!

Back in my day when we started doing it, people called us awkward and unwieldy and complained they couldn’t find the navigation links. Now it’s stylish! Pretty funny.

http://www.penandthink.com/niggle/
http://www.powazek.com/
http://atomiq.org/
http://www.7nights.com/asterisk

Where else? I want to write about this trend, need to find more examples.

Posted on September 23, 2005 10:06 AM | #

48. Kim Siever said:

It looks fresh. Clean and clear. Maybe a tad empty, but certainly fresh.

Posted on September 23, 2005 10:47 AM | #

49. Ian Cheung said:

Hey Keith,
Love this new redesign. Clean, uncluttered, to the point. This isn’t a “me too” comment though, I wasn’t too fussed on the last redesign and said so, so I think it is only fair to say that I love this one.

Undecided on the footer but the reduction on ad units gets a big thumbs up.

I don’t mind ads, and I definitely support the notion that people should make money from their sites if they want to but too many ads clutters things up and puts my brain on active ad filter mode. Kinda like the popcorn, hotdog and drinks ads before the movie.

Looking forward to seeing more of your live redesign.

Posted on September 25, 2005 10:02 PM | #

50. online directory main said:

hello! http://www.dirare.com/Sweden/ online directory. SMART Yellow Pages, About DIRare, Search in Business Category. From online directory .

Posted on March 23, 2006 01:09 PM | #

51. google pr main said:

hello! http://www.areaseo.com/contacts/ google pr. pagerank algorithm, Web Site Analysis, SE marketing. From google pr .