Boost logo

Boost :

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-03-23 09:31:05

Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti_at_[hidden]> writes:

> David Abrahams wrote:
>> Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti_at_[hidden]> writes:
> [...]
>>>I have to say that I dislike the look of that site and I consider
>>>its home page a good example of how a home page should not be
>>>designed. At 1024x768 there are three screenfuls of information and
>>>only the third one contains information that may be of any interest
>>>after the first time you visited the site, and that's assuming you
>>>know next to nothing about Python the first time.
>> That's fine, I think. What do I ever want that's on the Boost
>> homepage other than a link to some other part of the site? Not much,
>> I must say. Do you want to see something else on Boost's homepage?
>> We can't put everything there. It seems to me that filling the
>> homepage with content of interest to first- and second-time visitors
>> is about the best thing we can use it for.
> I was referring to the Python site in that case. Boost's choice is
> reasonable because just about the only interesting things in returning
> to these home pages are news headlines. Note that the Python home page
> was modified yesterday so that news aren't hidden towards the bottom of
> the page.

Good; the news were pushed too far down.

>>>Together with the ACCU one and Boost's own, I'm sorry to say, that's
>>>another site that was recently redesigned and where the result
>>>doesn't strike me as a clear improvement over the previous one.
>> What do you think would be an improvement.
> First off let me say that I'm well aware that this is a voluntary
> effort and I do believe that he who does decides how. I also know
> that some decisions were taken by vote, such as the choice of logo,
> so my voice carries very little weight and that's how it should be.
> The new site looks certainly slicker and more professional, but I find
> it unremarkable. This is probably due to different things. The choice of
> colours is a little bit dull; the new logo isn't bad looking, but it
> doesn't convey in any way what Boost stands for; the overall effect of a
> sheet of paper hovering above a darker background is apparenly what
> everybody does nowadays, not to mention that it wastes precious
> horizontal space and compresses the main text column, especially if one
> displays the browser's sidebar.
> Nothing really terrible, as you see, but in a way I feel that the
> old web site had more personality, even if it didn't depart much
> from how all web sites used to look in the mid nineties.

I asked you to explain what would be an improvement. I appreciate the
effort, but this is just a complaint. An explanation of what would
amount to an improvement could be really useful.

Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at