April 06, 2006
Web 2.0 Journal looks anything but
Um. Okay.
I know I tend to rip on those kooky Web 2.0 kids more than I should. But, in all honesty, I really do appreciate some of the design concepts that have been associated with the space. This is not me waffling. Although I'm very good at a well-orchestrated waffle. This is just how it is.
So here's my question: Why in the name of all that is good and decent does the Web 2.0 Journal look like this? Was Mike Rundle too busy working on another refresh of Om's site? Maybe the BusinessLogs or 9rules dockets are a tad full. I would imagine they are. Maybe they're just working on some new dance moves.
I don't know. Whatever the case, I'm still pretty sure there's at least one or two other designers out there who have this whole "design concept" thing down. I hear Khoi Vinh might have some time freeing up.
Okay, forget the fact that there even is a Web 2.0 Journal. Try to look beyond that. Focus! I know, I know. Don't even get me started. And please don't bring up the point about how it's not leveraging anything even remotely close to a Web 2.0 technology. What's that? They're trying to cash in on the hype?
Oh, I see.
Let's get back to the point. Why does it look like that? Is that what Web 2.0 looks like? I think not. Maybe they should spend a little quality time with the Web 2.0 design checklist. Or, better yet, get a designer, any designer, to take a cut at their UI.
Technorati tags: Web2.0,Web20, Web2, Design, Rundle
Web 2.0 Journal looks anything but
| | Subscribe:
RSS, Bloglines
