I'm going to make the argument that a 2nd gen design is a better idea than Bleeding Edge. Familiarity and ease of use are imho essential to a pleasant end-user experience. If you attempt to use new design elements you run the risk of confusing your visitors. Your site will not be intuitive to them.
Most people should follow suit of the largest sites since that's the most likely place users will learn how a web page behaves.
Comments?
Can Bleeding Edge be "pleasant and intuitive?"
Another related topic: Depending on your target market, is time time to say "piss on" older browsers and no longer worry about them at all?
I think I read Facebook and others have dropped support for IE7.
"The greater the risk, the greater the reward."
"Go big or go home."
That being said, good content will have a better impression than an original and unique design.
Bleeding Edge will be new. New is always less familiar. Less familiar is going to normally be less intuitive. I guess that's the trick with attempting to be Bleeding Edge successfully. To have that same familiarity for the end-user. Very difficult imho.
Quote:Another related topic: Depending on your target market, is time time to say "piss on" older browsers and no longer worry about them at all?
Anything 4th gen should get dropped. We're IE 9 now but Bleeding Edge is IE 10. You should stop supporting 7 or less.
(2013-01-25, 06:18 AM)labrocca Wrote: [ -> ]I'm going to make the argument that a 2nd gen design is a better idea than Bleeding Edge. Familiarity and ease of use are imho essential to a pleasant end-user experience. If you attempt to use new design elements you run the risk of confusing your visitors. Your site will not be intuitive to them.
Most people should follow suit of the largest sites since that's the most likely place users will learn how a web page behaves.
Comments?
I agree, this is one of the reasons I held of on using CSS3 features until recently
If people don't use new design elements, how do users come to know and become used to them?
It all revolves around audience for me. If I find a problem, can HTML5 or CSS3 (or whatever buzzword you want to pick) help solve it and improve the experience? Sadly, around 5% of the users that interact with projects still use IE7 - using a solution that doesn't work for that is a no go for me.
So, in summary, if bleeding edge has a graceful fallback for those who want to stay in the past I would use it.
I'd rather have something stable then something new. I run a 775 rig. My dad runs Sandy Bridge. He got his day 1 release, and he had to RMA it.
I'm still rocking 775 and I can do everything I need.
Explained; Why go with something that might break the next day? No need to be on the deck of the ship. It might end up being the titanic.
Quote:If people don't use new design elements, how do users come to know and become used to them?
When those with vast marketshare adopt new technologies they can quickly become acceptable.
Example is HTML5 won't be a big deal till someone like Youtube or Facebook incorporate it.
Quote: Sadly, around 5% of the users that interact with projects still use IE7
Are you sure that's just not 5% of the people that use IE? Because I have only 4.6% of all users still on IE at HF.
My breakdown of IE users who are only 4% of total browsers.
60% 9.0
19% 10.0
15% 8.0
5% 7.0
1% 6.0
Quote:So, in summary, if bleeding edge has a graceful fallback for those who want to stay in the past I would use it.
And as my first post states it's more about when to use "bleeding edge" technology more than when to stop supporting dead ones.
Youtube is basically HTML5 ready(the test version of it has been available for years). Personally I see little reason to not use HTML5 and CSS3 in the modern day. If you look into them it's so easy to set up fall backs for almost everything with little work.
Quote:Youtube is basically HTML5 ready(the test version of it has been available for years). Personally I see little reason to not use HTML5 and CSS3 in the modern day.
I think you just answered the question about what's a reason not to use it. Youtube (Google basically) hasn't even bothered to adopt it.
I'm sure HTML5 will eventually take hold. But if you adopt it early imho you run the risk of having visitor problems.