What are the Best Web Design Trends 2016?

Can Anyone suggest me the best web design trends in 2016

 

lightweight, sleek, and optimized for mobile

 

All I can say is if I see another site with a button that looks like this, I am going to puke:



Also, those stacked up designs (or whatever they're called) may look cool, but personally, the moment I see the divs stacking up one upon the other, on a page scroll, I just leave that site. I mean this type of a design: http://jsfiddle.net/Tgm6Y/2227/

 

NewsPaper themes & Magazine themes are trendy in 2016. People are choosing multi-purpose clean desing now-a-days. I am researching in themeforest for last 2 month. What I am noticing , some multi-purpose theme are being sold without any reason but its true people love multi-purpose magazine based theme.

 

I recommend you to read this article about web design trends in 2016 http://multi-programming.com/blog/web-design-trends-2016.
I think that the most interesting trends are:
* Flat design;
* Simple user interface;
* Hamburger menus for navigation;
* Rich animation and video headers;
* Minimalistic design.

 

optimized and responsive design.

 

First off, good rule of thumb? If it's "trendy" -- it's artsy fartsy bullshit just designed to wow the suits who know jack-all about websites, usually at the expense of telling visitors to said sites to go shtup themselves.

Stick to the basics -- semantic markup, progressively enhanced into a semi-fluid elastic responsive design -- built with separation of presentation from content, leveraging caching models, reducing the number of handshakes, and focusing on what's REALLY important, DELIVERING CONTENT TO USERS!

Anything else is art faygelah bullshit that's just slapping the rose coloured glasses on your head to lead you down the garden path to failure.

 

Both are terrible from the visitors' POV, though the hamburger is gaining acceptance purely due to widespread usage giving it a recognition factor. Otherwise, its just middle school cafeteria mystery meat. In fact, if you consult real usability experts, that's exactly what they call it, mystery meat.

The "Rich animation and video headers are simply abominable. They take up space better used to present actual useful content.

 

Well, true... but the technical terms for it are "ambiguous UI" and "False simplicity".

Same shit as dumping animated gif crap all over the place. Just because the technology for adding the crap has changed, doesn't mean it isn't the same goofy artsy crap that just makes sites slower, harder to use, harder to maintain, and generally just pissing off users.

The laugh being that one line is the antithesis of three of his five suggestions.

 

While the "hamburger menu" might be ambiguous, it's widespread usage means that it has become the default norm for presenting a menu on smaller screens (that, or the "traffic light", three circles on top of each other), hence removing quite a bit of the ambiguity. Personally, I don't really see the difference between the hamburger and just writing "menu"... They take up about the same amount of space

 

That's the argument I use a whole lot -- it's much akin to labels -- oh noes you have to make the room to show a form element's label all the time, NOT THAT! No matter how many times you explain to the artsy fartsy types that the "placeholder as a label" is inaccessible crap, they insist on shitting all over the site doing it.

I too would prefer "Show menu" and "Hide Menu" -- but that's only assuming you have enough main menu items to bother -- and to be frank if you have so many menu items to bother, well... much like with dropdown menus for desktop sizes it begs the questions what the **** is wrong with the site as it means either too many pages, or painfully convoluted content organization.

 

Hamburger menus are ok if they are clear / visible. Forget which site it was (it was some popular news site) the menu literally looked like this:



I hope it wasn't made look this unbelievably subtle in the name of some trend. But something tells me it probably was.

 

I've encountered a LOT of "designers" who seem to be under the impression that "flat design" actually MEANS borderline invisible colour contrasts. You can see it in how some crapplet designers seem to interpret google's "materials design" into something not only does it not say, but pretty much screams -- like a great number of "designer" things -- "accessibility, what's that?" or worse "usability? Who gives a ****!"

If the colour contrast is useless for text, it's going to be useless for vague iconography as well. You see that type of low contrast all the time on social media icons, particularly with grey on grey... again just proof that most of the dipshit PSD jockeys and halfwit mouth-breathers using things like client side frameworks generally don't know enough about accessibility, usability, functionality, HTML, CSS, WCAG, or any of the dozen other things that are basic requirements to be qualified to design ANYTHING.

 

Responsive design is more of a standard than trend now. Some people like to go the Material Design way.

 

It seems that Bootstrap has really become a trend. These sites all look mostly the same though. Big hero images, big text, big rounded buttons, paralax scrolling, etc. I would also agree that responsive design is mandatory now. It's up to designers to create new trends and improve the webs current rounded corner cookie cutter template look.

 

Responsive Web Design is the best web design trends!

 

I'd say make sure the website is both mobile friendly and responsive, lightweight, videos are being widely used but I'm not a fan, no matter what you do there's a deice or internet speed not responding well to that so try not to do it.

I saw you say you don't like the stacks, well it is a trend and I personally like them for specific clients such as an architect I am working with right now. Also this website might show how you can use something trivial so elegantly. http://porschevolution.com/

 

The trouble with that type of site is that there is no there there. It is good for a single viewing as it is purely an egocentric show site*. The page you linked is poorly written with non-semantic markup, too many gawd-awful scripts, especially the jQuery libs. Too many css files, but I've seen a lot worse. It does have that stupid css reset idiocy. Aw hell, everybody does nowadays, as worthless as it is.

gary

* Not always the web guy's doing. Artists (and that includes architects) seem infatuated with "ooh-look-at-me I are artistic, see my crayons" sites; long on form, short on substance.

 

You are right about the code, although I'm not coder but I can see the flaws, all in all maybe that's the marketer inside me that likes such an experience for and I quote "an egocentric show", the idea for such a show is not to grab a coder but to grab another egocentric person who is into such products and shows. This page does a good job as we tested this as an example with a group of high end clients and it works as only a catalog though not a converting page. But again I understand your point of view as well.

 

Methinks we have a different definition of the term "elegant' -- that bloated, slow, inaccessible, scripttarded TRAIN WRECK of both how NOT to design a website nor how to code one is a poster child for everything WRONG with development today.

Giant blank screen with nothing to tell me why I should even give a **** to investigate further? CHECK!

No visual indication to show where the link to the next page actually is, so you're blindly hunting around to find it? CHECK!

Goofy time wasting page-load animated bullshit that doesn't even work properly on first-load? CHECK!

Zero scripting off graceful degradation? CHECK!

Massive bandwidth wasting full screen images with scripttard parallax asshattery that doesn't work right on anything other than 1920x1080? CHECK!

Playing music and sound effects to piss off users? CHECK!

Icon for turning that crap off hard to find thanks to lack of contrast? CHECK!

Pixel metric fonts telling users with accessibility needs to go shtup themselves? CHECK.

Epic failure at web design and development, and that's without me popping the boot to have a look at the engine... It lives up to the joke about Porsche's being nothing more than a glorified VW beetle with a body kit. That site is a V-Tec logo slapped on a base model slush-box Honda Civic. It's $10K paint job on a 1984 North American market Yugo GV. It would only impress people who know but two things, and Jack left town.

STUNNING example of the idiotic halfwit ignorant BULLSHIT that AWWWards hands them out to since they too could give a shit about standards, specifications, functionality, usability, accessibility, sustainability. culpability, or anything else that might actually require ability to do other than "ooh pretty"

Since it doesn't matter HOW pretty it is if the result tells large swaths of users to take it where the sun doesn't shine like Ned Beatty in "Deliverance"! Squeal like a pig boy!!!

Entirely what happens when art faygelahs delude themselves into thinking they are designers when they don't know enough about websites to be designing a blasted thing, and a LOT of users are sick of this shit!