ESPN Redesign

[Hawkeye009]

I'm sure that designers and web folks love it because it follows the new design fad, but I hate that new format. I also dislike it on every other site that is using it, so I'm not sure that I just hate change. Is there a more appealing sports site to use?

 

[hawkhead87]

Hate it
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[TJ8869]

I hardly ever visit ESPN's site anyway. I hate that it automatically launches videos.

 

[BubsFinn]

Yeah, that auto-play stuff is terrible. Haven't been to the updated site.

 

[ANYCHawk]

Originally posted by TJ8869:
I hardly ever visit ESPN's site anyway. I hate that it automatically launches videos.

New one seems to eliminate that.

 

[theiacowtipper]

Other than this site, my favorite sports related site used to be si.com. They went to the new format and ruined that site, it seems that ESPN has fallen into the same trap. If they truly eliminated autoplay of videos, that is a huge step in the right direction.

 

[belezabro]

Looks like a Twitter account page.

 

[DrVenkman]

unusable. i threw out my computer because of it

 

[Pepperman]

Originally posted by theiacowtipper:

If they truly eliminated autoplay of videos, that is a huge step in the right direction.

They eliminated it from the main page, but if you click on a story, it still often times auto-launches a video player. I hate this so much. I just want to read the story. If I wanted to watch TV, I'd turn a TV on.

 

[bagdropper]

cbssports for me...the auto-plays are much less troublesome. But that' just for general sports. I go to team-specific sites for my info on the teams that matter to me.

 

[shawpaw]

I don't understand the appeal of making the actual text area just a fraction of the screen. Their soccer page went to that format nearly a year ago and I still hate it, and SI is completely unreadable now. I don't even visit SI anymore.

 

[2winCitiesHawk]

It's all due to building websites with responsive design in mind- meaning the same site that runs on a desktop will scale down if viewed from mobile. This equals less development and maintenance cost. No need for a mobile version of a website.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[THE_DEVIL]

Originally posted by DrVenkman:

unusable. i threw out my computer because of it

 

[pezhawk]

I like it. But I'm a web designer/developer so at this point non-responsive sites annoy me.

I
saw a beta of the new ESPN site at least 6 months ago, they have been
tweaking for quite awhile. Responsive or mobile first is pretty much
the future of websites at least for the foreseeable future, so if you hate this, the web is only going to get worse.

I would imagine the next upgrade to rivals and these boards will be going that route as well.

 

[Hawkeye009]

Originally posted by pezhawk:
I like it. But I'm a web designer/developer so at this point non-responsive sites annoy me.



I

saw a beta of the new ESPN site at least 6 months ago, they have been

tweaking for quite awhile. Responsive or mobile first is pretty much

the future of websites at least for the foreseeable future, so if you hate this, the web is only going to get worse.



I would imagine the next upgrade to rivals and these boards will be going that route as well.

That's what I gathered. Developers get in their world and we see these designs cycle through. Sometimes this is for the better. Other times, like these, I think it's for the worse. I hope this design fad passes soon and they figure out a way to accommodate mobile while keeping decent looking and functioning sites for those of us who prefer the logical ordering of information over panels of graphics and information.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[pezhawk]

Originally posted by Hawkeye009:

Originally posted by pezhawk:
I like it. But I'm a web designer/developer so at this point non-responsive sites annoy me.



I

saw a beta of the new ESPN site at least 6 months ago, they have been

tweaking for quite awhile. Responsive or mobile first is pretty much

the future of websites at least for the foreseeable future, so if you hate this, the web is only going to get worse.



I would imagine the next upgrade to rivals and these boards will be going that route as well.

That's what I gathered. Developers get in their world and we see these designs cycle through. Sometimes this is for the better. Other times, like these, I think it's for the worse. I hope this design fad passes soon and they figure out a way to accommodate mobile while keeping decent looking and functioning sites for those of us who prefer the logical ordering of information over panels of graphics and information.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

I don't see this fade passing until people quit surfing the web on tablets and smart phones, and that genie is out of the bottle. On responsive sites the prioritizing of content is a priority, the lazy loading espn has going on (more content loading as you scroll down the page) has nothing to do with responsive.

Responsive sites eliminated the extra cost of developing device specific apps and maintaining multiple content bases for your main site, then your mobile site etc.

 

[Hawkeye009]

Of course it reduces cost, but that doesn't mean that it necessarily creates a better product for users. The question is which has a bigger impact on the bottom line.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[pezhawk]

I think it provides a better experience to more people, it's not perfect, some sites are better at it than others, for espn larger sites with tons of content and navigation can be a trick, but they will likely, test and revise continually based on feedback. It dump the lazy loading, personally I find that annoying.

Until something better comes along, it will be the new norm.

Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[hawkitd]

Originally posted by Hawkeye009:
I'm sure that designers and web folks love it because it follows the new design fad, but I hate that new format. I also dislike it on every other site that is using it, so I'm not sure that I just hate change. Is there a more appealing sports site to use?

I've used CBSSports.com for years. It has always been much easier to read & find the stuff you're looking for. I had no idea ESPN revamped its site, you'll be fine without it.

 

[Kinnick 4 Prez]

Don't like it. Way too busy. I only scrolled for maybe one full roll of the mouse and saw the same headline 3 times on the front page.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[gonegolfing]

Pez why argue a losing argument? The new site sucks and almost everyone knows it. Do you do it because you are defending your profession?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[pezhawk]

Originally posted by gonegolfing:
Pez why argue a losing argument? The new site sucks and almost everyone knows it. Do you do it because you are defending your profession?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

I was defending responsive design, the things people are annoyed with their new site has nothing to do with responsive design, the never ending content is something separate,

ESPN's latest website isn't it's best effort but it has nothing to do with responsive design.

The market drives my industry and it's been in the responsive camp for a few years, and it's not going away.

My profession is web designer, 16 years ago when I started, wasn't so sure, but today, I'm pretty confident my profession has some legs, don't judge responsive design based off of ESPN's execution of it, because I'd venture many sites you visit are responsive and you don't know it.

By the way, people hate change, even moreso online.

This post was edited on 4/3 9:41 PM by pezhawk

 

[jbincr]

Originally posted by pezhawk:

Originally posted by gonegolfing:
Pez why argue a losing argument? The new site sucks and almost everyone knows it. Do you do it because you are defending your profession?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

I was defending responsive design, the things people are annoyed with their new site has nothing to do with responsive design, the never ending content is something separate,

ESPN's latest website isn't it's best effort but it has nothing to do with responsive design.

The market drives my industry and it's been in the responsive camp for a few years, and it's not going away.

My profession is web designer, 16 years ago when I started, wasn't so sure, but today, I'm pretty confident my profession has some legs, don't judge responsive design based off of ESPN's execution of it, because I'd venture many sites you visit are responsive and you don't know it.

By the way, people hate change, even moreso online.

This post was edited on 4/3 9:41 PM by pezhawk

I think you are talking over their heads. Most computer users have no idea what "responsive design" is, and even though you explained it (nicely), since they've never written a line of HTML (let alone CSS3), they won't really understand it.

BTW, I also hate the load-on-scroll design, too. But I guess it's better than clickbait multipage sites.

 

[Hawkeye009]

Jbincr- The complaints in this thread have nothing to do with the technicalities of programming or responsive design. That's what seems to be missing. If people don't like the result as users, it doesn't matter whether or makes more sense to designers or is cheaper for companies. That doesn't mean that companies or designers will change, but it doesn't mean that the websites appeal to users.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[pezhawk]

Originally posted by Hawkeye009:
Jbincr- The complaints in this thread have nothing to do with the technicalities of programming or responsive design. That's what seems to be missing. If people don't like the result as users, it doesn't matter whether or makes more sense to designers or is cheaper for companies. That doesn't mean that companies or designers will change, but it doesn't mean that the websites appeal to users.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

009, if ESPN sees a sustained significant decline in traffic as a result of the redesign I would think they will change things. The new design for espn is fine, it is the content choices they have made imho, and from what I gather your issue as well. But you are right if people don't like an experience they will find a different place to get the same information.

I would think ESPN did a lot of user testing on this design (having people actually try to use the site and see if they can accomplish certain tasks) and am a little surprised they went this route, but facebook uses the same lazy loading approach as well as many retail sites.

 

[Hawkeye009]

Absolutely agree pez. Just expressing my dislike and asking for alternative recommendations. I personally think this new wave is more about cost control than quality and I look forward to better solutions than mimicking Windows' tiles design.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[pezhawk]

Originally posted by Hawkeye009:
Absolutely agree pez. Just expressing my dislike and asking for alternative recommendations. I personally think this new wave is more about cost control than quality and I look forward to better solutions than mimicking Windows' tiles design.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

It is partially about cost control, but with the mobile/tablet explosion, the industry has changed, there are so many different devices that can access the web now, all at different sizes and many of them with significant share, it would be impossible to provide an app for each device, even if you had the money to do so, it would be impractical to try and maintain that many apps and content bases, it's not being cheap, it's just common sense.

Many of our clients are pushing 50% of their traffic coming from a non-desktop/laptop device, but the bigger issue is of that 50% there are 5-6 different screen sizes getting a significant share ranging from 320px wide up to 1024px wide...

The tiled/card approach I think is a trend that is at the beginning of it's life span, will be curious how long it sticks around.