Similarity of sites. Topic is solved
-
jwhook
Similarity of sites.
I've been visiting a number of sites from the show off forum, and it seemed to me that there is quite a bit of similarity in the layout and design of the sites. I was wondering if that's because CMSMS tends to impose certain design approaches, or just how it turned out? My understanding was that one of the reasons for using CMSMS is that other CMSes do tend to force particular layouts.
-
stopsatgreen
- Power Poster
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 1:24 am
Re: Similarity of sites.
Here are a couple of sites I've set up using CMSMS:
http://www.theatre-rites.co.uk/
http://www.sunanddoves.co.uk/
http://www.arsenalnewsreview.co.uk/
While I've used some of my own preferences - logo and navigation on the left - I think you can see that it's flexible enough to power very different layouts.
http://www.theatre-rites.co.uk/
http://www.sunanddoves.co.uk/
http://www.arsenalnewsreview.co.uk/
While I've used some of my own preferences - logo and navigation on the left - I think you can see that it's flexible enough to power very different layouts.
Re: Similarity of sites.
most sites look similar because people tend to just modify the default templates..
if you start from scratch you can do almost anything you want.
if you start from scratch you can do almost anything you want.
-
moorezilla
Re: Similarity of sites.
yeah... this is really true about just about ALL the sites on the web, not just ones built in cmsms.
1. Certain navigational placements seem to work and have become semi-standard.
2. Publishing, whether web- or paper-based, is publishing, and ultimately sites need to be easy to read and easy to print. This lends itself to a certain amount of similarity.
3. Many publishers (like me!) are lazy; Many consumers (like me!) are also lazy. A site that breaks new ground might impress a viewer once; the creator will long be sick of it by the time it goes live. A site that is easy to use will always get more repeat users. A site that is both... well... that's a lot of work.
4. None of this has anything to do with CMSMS. You could make fantastic templates that would make your site unrecognizeably powered by CMSMS, except of course by the link you'd leave on and the donation you'd make to the project.
am
1. Certain navigational placements seem to work and have become semi-standard.
2. Publishing, whether web- or paper-based, is publishing, and ultimately sites need to be easy to read and easy to print. This lends itself to a certain amount of similarity.
3. Many publishers (like me!) are lazy; Many consumers (like me!) are also lazy. A site that breaks new ground might impress a viewer once; the creator will long be sick of it by the time it goes live. A site that is easy to use will always get more repeat users. A site that is both... well... that's a lot of work.
4. None of this has anything to do with CMSMS. You could make fantastic templates that would make your site unrecognizeably powered by CMSMS, except of course by the link you'd leave on and the donation you'd make to the project.
am
-
Pierre M.
Re: Similarity of sites.
BTW, do you know http://themes.cmsmadesimple.org/ to choose a design ?
I stress what tsw has written : with CMSms, you can do (almost) anything you want.
Either you use existing templates (default ones or shared themes) or you create your own.
It is soooooooooo easy to put the menu at the bottom (just an example).
Have fun
Pierre M.
I stress what tsw has written : with CMSms, you can do (almost) anything you want.
Either you use existing templates (default ones or shared themes) or you create your own.
It is soooooooooo easy to put the menu at the bottom (just an example).
Have fun
Pierre M.
