Comments on Are We There Yet?

stewart dean — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:31 GMT

PS? – oh you mean PublicSquare. Decode your language – you’ve been near too many programmers! Personally I’m not after a specialist tool, one designed to a particular type of site as, in my experience, that is completely arbitrary. One man work flow control interface is another persons needless bloat. For some Web 2.0 is about users to some it’s about confusing users (I mean who apart from the techincal ‘haves’ actualy get what a RSS feed is? How many actualy use them?) I’m very cynical about yet another new CMS but am interested to see what you guys are coming up with.

Christina Wodtke — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:30 GMT

I think the problem is we are looking for “the ultimate CMS” when we should be looking (and building) the right-fitting CMS. I’m sure some folks will use PS for things it wasn’t built for once we’re live, but I hope that people who are seeking a tool between a monster CMS and a teensy blogging tool will find us, and find that like goldilocks, this one is “just right.”

stewart dean — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:29 GMT

I recently have had to work on a ‘test’ project – one where I was filling all roles with some help. Usualy I work with a fairly big team and the CMS is already in place growling at me (usualy two versions out of date and with a big list of ‘we can’t do that’s.

What I found is all open source PHP based content management systems simply are not open (they have a particular way of working), and are very much driven by adding functionality, not getting a simple working application. This, in my experience is also true for commercial products and, as yet, I have yet to meet a CMS I would say even knew what an information architect was.

In the end I dropped my Microsoft prejudice after being recommended a tool called Umbraco (www.umbraco.net). This by no means have all the features of, say Drupal, but that’s what makes it work better. It works in a similair way to Serena Collage (http://www.serena.com/) but is less confused and doesnt have any work flow (that I can see).

To get the most out of the program requires some knowllege .net or XSLT (my personal preference) but in terms of creating a site, creating news stories, letting you end users update things and in general deliver what you had in mind rather than what the CMS wants you do to it works well.

The ultimate CMS doesnt appear to exist, in fact there’s nothing close out there in my view, but Umbraco did allow me to build the site how I wanted it to be and all the ‘can’t do that’ problems where about adding a few more lines of code into the XSLT templates. Yes it has it’s problems but it’s worth a play.

Christina Wodtke — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:27 GMT

I’m sorry, but any site with that confusing of a website has got to be too hard to use.

jean Rémy Duboc — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:24 GMT

If you want a good open-source for collaborative publications, have a look at SPIP (www.spip.net). It is very flexible, very practical, and, well, it’s just good. Worth your time, I assure you.

Jack Bellis — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:24 GMT

Christina,
Great info, thanks. I’ve been enjoying B&A for years now. Just wanted to share a few thoughts.

Instead of “We welcome you to help us as we grown, ...” did you really mean “groan?” (I know, you meant “grow.”)

A key theme to me centers around your statement: “Collaborative iteration is the secret…” I’ll continue the Edison line of thought, but with a slightly different slant. I’m also a fan of an IXDA-er’s signature quote… “Design is a process – an intimate collaboration between engineers, designers, and clients.” – Dreyfuss, Industrial Designer. Somehow we cling to this notion that there is a holy grail process. Only if you consider 7 rounds of trial and correction a “process” is there a process for something as intricate as today’s software design challenge. I recently heard someone say in a Philly presentation “All processes are essentially broken.” To me the limiting factor isn’t adherence to some sort of procedural map so much as a pre-arranged willingness to make changes until we get it right.

Livia Labate — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:24 GMT

Seeing that the mission statement helped so much to get through the bumpy re-design road, and that that there are clear plans for the future (wanting to make it self-sustaining), are you taking it to the next level and writing a business plan?

On that note, what kind of immediate help is needed? I’ve been reading B&A from day one and have wanted to collaborate, but I know writing and helping editorial is not how I’ll do that. What else do you need? Or better, what do you need the most?

Georgi Varzonovtsev — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:22 GMT

I think I said it when design competition results came out but I’ll say it again:

If it works, don’t fix it.

The first design of B&A was appropriate and pleasing. And it was working. So please, just publish more of the good stories we are used to find here and don’t bother with the visuals.

Christian Crumlish — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:22 GMT

Good story. Can’t wait to see the new design in action.

A little feedback on publicsquare: The urls it makes could use work. maybe the slug should be editable? also, google and some other search engines don’t recognize underscores as word breaks, so that can harm findability. (Hyphens do work.)

Rahel Anne Bailie — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:22 GMT

It takes a a lot of courage to bare your mistakes, particularly when admission live on forever in a blog post somewhere. Your candor is commendable – we can all learn from this, and use your experience as a resource for some of our own clients who might otherwise hold out for what they think is a cheap-and-easy solution. Here’s to being human!

Steven Thornton — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:22 GMT

Great, honest look at an often typical redesign project. Funny, though, I’ve never considered a redesign a minor project! Not sure it’s entirely applicable, but remember the overquoted Thomas Edison:

“I have not failed 700 times. I have not failed once. I have succeeded in proving that those 700 ways will not work. When I have eliminated the ways that will not work, I will find the way that will work.”

(Just hope your budget or sanity do not run out before the end.)

That’s the way I’ve viewed the evolution of human factors and usability since the Web took off in the 90’s. We as practitioners have had the opportunity to learn from our experiences and share them with each other. As a result, consider how far we’ve all come. Do you remember the proliferation of truly horrendous designs during the Wild West Web Days in the mid to late 90’s?

Zephyr Zephyr — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:22 GMT

I wholehearted agree with Tom. Thanks for an insightful and honest article!

Tom Tom — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:21 GMT

Love the story. Thanks for sharing the good with the bad. Most companies only try to make themselves look great, so worried about their image. Honesty is a forgotten value and people forget how much people appreciate honesty. Love the new look so far.

Austin Govella — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:21 GMT

I love the most recent iteration. It looks great! I especially like the weighted category navigation.

And the way Professional Practice breaks the grid is a nice touch.

Jason Ford — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:53:21 GMT

While it sounds like it’s been a long complicated process to get where you are now, you have definitely taken the right approach to make the CMS and design changes independently. So many sites try to make those two changes at the same time which is even more of a nightmare!

I’m also glad to hear your bit about focusing on the “Y” – I’m looking forward to watching as the magazine grows and matures.