Logo Position

I understand what you are saying RZ...
I agree on a number of aspects also.

1) Design should not be restricted to what suits "The higher percentage"
2) Sticking to conformity is not necessarially the best option.

However I do have a couple of reasons for choosing to design the vast majority of sites I work on like this...

1) I prefer it. I like the idea of an internet that is conformist and easy to use. (It's not possible, but I like the idea because It pisses me off having to think when I'm looking for information - thinking is what I use print media and film for).
2) This is not by any means a small site. It is for a multinational coorporation, needs to be completley accessible, available in 32 different languages, and easy to use.
3) Design (for the sake of it) for most of the sites I work on is not the first priority. I am expected to produce sites that convert visitors to sales and are easy for Joe Average the "businessman" to use.

I completly agree that I shouldn't have to think of websites in this linear fashion when I design them. At the same time however, I really like the idea that the web is an easy place to navigate.
This is why our clients choose us, and I don't intend to go against the grain just for the sake of it.

[Besides, this site looks great just the way it is. It would be a shame to move things around and spoil it just for the sake of "design"]

 

SEBasic- that was a very well written answer with good reasoning. I am too anal-litical (my wife says it that way ??) to do a site that is artsy in design like Relax does. He is creative and brilliant in his designs, yet I agree with you reasoning.

 

i am not arguing the 'design for the sake of design' side of this issue.
thats not my bag either.
i read your first post and the responses and was bewildered by the 'conformist' attitude that what you said was some hard fast 'rule' and that everyone seemed to agree to this concept without question.

the internet is still new.
it is still evolving.
like everything else in this world...there are those who 'need' to put limits on things in their life and the people and events around them....and there are those people who believe in experimentation and diversion and disruption for the sake of expression and growth and innovation.
there are no 'rules' or 'laws' about what defines a web site or how it should make you feel or think or react.
this is up to the individual company and web designer.
this is the beauty of the internet....freedom of expression.
with the click of a mouse you can jump from a christian book store to a lesbian porn site.....if thats your wish.

thats what i believe....
so...to boil good design down to a list of rules....
...one being 'logo goes at top left' is not part of my belief system for design.
i do agree that there are different approaches needed for different audiences.
but...in your original post....you didnt mention the type of site it was and didnt express the nature of the site as your 'reason' to make the site more 'conservative' or 'standardized' in appeal.
it felt more like a 'blanket statement' about web design to me.

 

debunked is getting high in his van most of the time...
...so i never really listen to his input.

 

Agreed 100%.
There is no real need to develop sites in one way or another. The only restrictions that are put on a website are what can actually be done, and what works well.
Logo top-left works well. (There's no denying that).

I also agree with this post.
As you can see however from my previous post, there are certain needs that have to be met for %99 of web development.
When a client comes to me they don't say - "I want the most exclusive website on the net. I want something that looks completely out of the norm. I want a website that people have to think about how to use it".
I am here to meet a need, and that need is to produce sites that sell...

My first post wasn't 100% clear on this point and I apologise for not mentioning the kind of site that was being developed.

However, coming back to this point.

I 100% agree with that.
Do you think though, that sites can be developed that can still stir emotion and provoke reaction, while at the same time being easy to navigate?

I design 99.999% of the sites I work on with the logo in the top-left of the screen.
I don't need to do that, but I do because I think that when people stick to certian rules of design for websites, that the results are a lot more beneficial to the owner of said site.

Here's a good example of a website that is working with design for the sake of it.
http://www.graffdiamonds.com/

Not only do I find that website unclear to navigate, but it also RESIZED MY BROWSER WINDOW TO ACCOMODATE THE STUPID FLASH...
That, it bad design.

If they had stuck to the "basic rules" of web development, then I would not be posting now and slagging the site off.


Another...
http://www.burton-on-trent.com/

OK, this is a little harsh. The design is crap.
But I'm going to try and focus on the layout...
Well, it's not really laid out is it...
Try and navigate the site. Then try and find your way back to the home page...

It's not easy to do is it....

If the "Rules" of development had been adhered to, finding your way around that site would have been easy...

Here a a whole bunch of examples of what in my opinion, are crap sites.

http://www.frontiernet.net/~docbob/
http://www.uglyotter.com/

I got these sites from "Web Pages That Suck"...

All of these examples have failed to do a couple of things...

1) Keep the navigation consistent throughout any site
2) Make it easy to get back to the home page
3) Structured information in "Clusters" to make it easy to read...

Those are a few of My pet peeves....
Anyway, I've gone off on a bit of a tangent, but I think I'm still saying the same kind of thing...

If you work to a set of "Design Rules" when you develop your sites, you are far more likely to succeed in terms of attracting new business and generating revenue...

This is just my $0.02

 

Nice to have you around again - you always make me laugh. The nice thing with VW's is you can just sniff the fumes to get high.

 

...i find it no great surprise that YOU are the person who discovered this fact.