New python.org website
Phoe6
website going live. There is a change in the look n feel, wherein it
looks "more official" and maximum possible information about python is
now directly accessible from the home page itself. Kudoes to the
design team.
Senthil
http://phoe6.livejournal.com
mwt
Ian Parker
Phoe6 <orse...@gmail.com> writes
I like the look of it generally, however two points:
1) There is no way to return to the Home page from the LHS menu. You
can click on Python In the logo but that's perhaps not obvious
2) I think the logo is a little faint, washed-out. I'd prefer something
more dynamic, or at least brighter.
(I suppose this shows how superficial my checking was!)
Regards
Ian
--
Ian Parker
Nicola Musatti
Phoe6 wrote:
> beta.python.org evolved very nice and noticed today the new python.org
> website going live. There is a change in the look n feel, wherein it
> looks "more official" and maximum possible information about python is
> now directly accessible from the home page itself. Kudoes to the
> design team.
Sigh! Another of these sites that all look the same, with two
screenfuls of info on the home page that are going to be in the way of
every returning user...
Not to mention the dull color scheme and the unremarkable logo. I can't
say I'm impressed.
Cheers,
Nicola Musatti
Michael Tobis
me as awful.
I tried to suggest repurposing the much better PyCon logo, but it
didn't raise the vast groundswell of support I wanted it to. But for
whatever its worth I'll try again. My rant is here:
mt
projecktzero
picking that's going on from the armchair web designers. The new site
is clean and professional. It needs to go live soon!
projecktzero
Michael
that it kind of just melts away in my mind. Maybe giving a little color
in the menu bar on the right would help. My experience is that white is
a bad background color when over used.
--
Michael McGlothlin, tech monkey
Tub Monkey
http://www.tubmonkey.com/
Kay Schluehr
> The new website is to blah. It's so light colored across the whole thing
> that it kind of just melts away in my mind. Maybe giving a little color
> in the menu bar on the right would help. My experience is that white is
> a bad background color when over used.
I agree. The text is too loud and the colors are too low. Otherwise
Fredrik Lundh reminded me that there are no good PL language home pages
out there at all. This shouldn't excuse a mediocre design but it
softened my annoyance a little.
Steven Bethard
> beta.python.org evolved very nice and noticed today the new python.org
> website going live. There is a change in the look n feel, wherein it
> looks "more official" and maximum possible information about python is
> now directly accessible from the home page itself. Kudoes to the
> design team.
I want to second that!
A moment aside to all the complainers. If you don't like the format,
color scheme, etc., could you take a half an hour and mock up a better
format that shows what you'd like to see? Honestly, if you come up with
a style that everyone agrees is better than what's there now, I'd bet
people would be glad to change it. Especially if it's just switching a
CSS stylesheet.
STeVe
Kay Schluehr
Steven, that's not how design works. That's more a feverish dream of
techies about painture and the relationship bewteen expression, color
and space: replace the theme, fumble around your style-sheet... No one
of the complainers and negativists do claim that they could do it much
better. But I think at times it might be usefull to consult
professional aid. I'm still not sure what the PSF is for...
Kay
Max M
> I think the new site is great. I really don't understand all the nit
> picking that's going on from the armchair web designers.
It's a nice site. It is not ugly, and its easy to navigate.
*much* better than the old site,
--
hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark
http://www.mxm.dk/
IT's Mad Science
Max M
http://www.python.org/
http://www.perl.org/
http://www.java.org/
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/
http://java.sun.com/
http://www.php.net/
It is pretty easy to see that http://www.python.org/ is both prettier
than the rest, and has a far better structure.
Fredrik Lundh
unfortunately, I don't think "but the others are no better" is an acceptable
goal for the Python universe I live in... after all, what's the fun with that?
</F>
Roy Smith
you a "404 File Not Found". I've opened a critical ticket on this in the
bug tracker. I see there's another ticket open already on a similar issue.
My recommendation would be that if these can't be resolved in very short
order. to revert to the old site until these are fixed.
Tim Parkin
fixed
Ted
I like it. It's not perfect but is much better than the old one in all
ways. A huge improvement.
Thanks to the website team.
Ant
better than the old cheesy green python. Has a more professional feel
to it, which can be important if you want to use the language outside
of your free time...
Michael Tobis
> of the complainers and negativists do claim that they could do it much
> better.
Indeed, I do not have to be able to write a particular program to
notice it has bugs.
On the other hand, (since I think the design, while not brilliant, is
good) fixing the logo is something that can be achieved without too
much fuss.
> But I think at times it might be usefull to consult
> professional aid.
In the case of the logo design, I am not sure I agree.
I think the twisted logo
http://saph.twistedmatrix.com/blog/archives/twisted.png
and the PyCon logo
http://mirrors.ccs.neu.edu/Python/pub/old-www/pics/pycon-logo.gif
were probably not designed by professional designers but rather by
people who appreciate Python, and yet do have more appeal to the
community and the outside world alike. If we are going to use a snake
motif, we should use snakes that look like snakes.
I suspect the current shy-tadpoles design was outsourced.
(At one point NBC abandoned their very recognizable peacock for a
totally vapid geometric design, for which they paid many thousands of
dollars. (Including a huge settlement with a Nebraska TV station whose
logo they had essentially copied) Eventually they reverted to a
somewhat stylized peacock, which was a much better idea.) See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Broadcasting_Company_logos
It's also interesting in passing to notice that another one of NBC's
non-peacock logos was called the "snake", for reasons that will escape
anyone who has not seen it animated.
In any case, I will probably take a little more time to make the case
that the shy tadpoles logo is a mistake.
Finally, I disagree that the current logo is better than the neutral
but consistently used php logo or the very clever java coffee mug logo,
and notably the Ruby on Rails logo, which is first rate.
mt
Fredrik Lundh
> > No one of the complainers and negativists do claim that they could do it much
> > better.
>
> Indeed, I do not have to be able to write a particular program to
> notice it has bugs.
just wait until you mention that rottened egg you found yesterday, and
all the chickens in the world start calling you names...
</F>
Michael
Just a little more color. With HTML designed for CSS you can do a lot
with some tweaks to the stylesheets too. I don't have time to spend a
lot of effort on redesigning other peoples websites though.
Kay Schluehr
Michael Tobis wrote:
> > No one
> > of the complainers and negativists do claim that they could do it much
> > better.
>
> Indeed, I do not have to be able to write a particular program to
> notice it has bugs.
>
> On the other hand, (since I think the design, while not brilliant, is
> good) fixing the logo is something that can be achieved without too
> much fuss.
>
> > But I think at times it might be usefull to consult
> > professional aid.
>
> In the case of the logo design, I am not sure I agree.
>
> I think the twisted logo
>
> http://saph.twistedmatrix.com/blog/archives/twisted.png
>
> and the PyCon logo
>
> http://mirrors.ccs.neu.edu/Python/pub/old-www/pics/pycon-logo.gif
>
> were probably not designed by professional designers but rather by
> people who appreciate Python, and yet do have more appeal to the
> community and the outside world alike. If we are going to use a snake
> motif, we should use snakes that look like snakes.
Maybe its time for me to abandone this discussion. If you and others
feel quite well represented by a pasty and wordy snake than go for it.
I do neither feel embraced nor bitten by it. And I don't just mean the
logo. We can do an awfull lot of comparisons with pages that failed but
this doesn't bring forth anything.
This evening we talked at the Hofbraeuhaus at Munich about Michelangelo
whose sixtine chapel images where once overpainted because his figures
appeared naked "as god created them". But maybe he was wrong and his
customer, the pope, was right and they were actually born with a leaf
covered their pubic hairs? The pope had to take responsibility and had
to appease possible and real critics. We can assume he was far from
being an idiot but a serious man - a politician. As a serious person
myself I'm always a little splitted between Michelangelo and the pope.
My own idealism expects Michelangelo doing such outstanding things that
it is beyond anything. Nothing could be better than having the uptights
as the most severe enemies. What a fun! But as it seems my political
party is guided by ordinary indifferent humans as well and Michelangelo
may be as much attracted by it as I am by e.g. the german social
democratic party? So I should track back and rethink "the professional
aid" which might be not what I'm really looking for. Guido feels a deep
joy about the resonance between Python and an programmer and artist -
Juergen Scheible - who likes the language, feels inspired by it and
creates a little artwork for Nokia 60s. So there is some inversion in
the right direction. Suddenly Python appears a bit distorted within
another context and it becomes sexy again. Should we talk about Apple
next ... ?
Nicola Musatti
Michael Tobis wrote:
[...]
> On the other hand, (since I think the design, while not brilliant, is
> good) fixing the logo is something that can be achieved without too
> much fuss.
The obviously perfect logo would be Kaa's face:
http://disney.go.com/vault/archives/villains/kaa/kaa.html
After all even my two and a half year old kids know that Kaa is *the*
python. However I suspect it would take a lot of money to license that.
[...]
> Finally, I disagree that the current logo is better than the neutral
> but consistently used php logo or the very clever java coffee mug logo,
> and notably the Ruby on Rails logo, which is first rate.
The Java logo has the problem that it is not universal: in Italy for
instance the name "Java" has no connection with "coffee".
Cheers,
Nicola Musatti
Magnus Lycka
> beta.python.org evolved very nice and noticed today the new python.org
> website going live. There is a change in the look n feel, wherein it
> looks "more official" and maximum possible information about python is
> now directly accessible from the home page itself. Kudoes to the
> design team.
I also feel this is a big improvement.
I know that a web site like this needs constant nurturing, so
I hope that it's been developed in such as way that it will
be easier to maintain it and to involve more contributors.
Concerning style sheets, it's pretty trivial to make several
style sheets and let people use the one they like best.
If we enable that, it should also be simple to see from the
web site statistics which style sheet people prefer. Then we
can use the most popular style sheet as the default!
Since people have different tastes, different screens with
various resolutions and colors etc, darker or lighter rooms,
might want different styles for on-screen viewing and on paper
etc, I think it would be a good idea to have several styes
even if there is no ambivalence concerning what look we want.
Magnus Lycka
> The obviously perfect logo would be Kaa's face:
> http://disney.go.com/vault/archives/villains/kaa/kaa.html
The Soviet version is better, and I think most of the
Maugli movies are made before 1973, which means that
they aren't copyrighted outside the former Soviet Union.
(Disclaimer: IANAL)
I'm not sure either version really works as a logo though.
msoulier
paragraph in bolded text. What, you figure the readers can't figure out
how to find "What is Python?" by themselves?
Bold should be used sparingly. This is serious overuse.
Otherwise, I like it.
Roy Smith
I'm OK with bold for stuff like this, but the wording could be better. The
last sentence:
Many Python programmers report substantial productivity
gains and feel the language encourages the development of
higher quality, more maintainable code.
reads like a drug warning label, carefully crafted to not run afoul of
regulatory constraints. Just say what you want to say:
Python programmers are more productive and the language
encourages development of higher quality, more maintainable
code.
Steven Bethard
> I'm OK with bold for stuff like this, but the wording could be better. The
> last sentence:
>
> Many Python programmers report substantial productivity
> gains and feel the language encourages the development of
> higher quality, more maintainable code.
>
> reads like a drug warning label, carefully crafted to not run afoul of
> regulatory constraints. Just say what you want to say:
>
> Python programmers are more productive and the language
> encourages development of higher quality, more maintainable
> code.
Please add a new ticket to the tracker:
http://psf.pollenation.net/cgi-bin/trac.cgi/newticket
(You can get to that from "Report website bug" -> "add a new ticket")
STeVe
Peter Mayne
>
> This evening we talked at the Hofbraeuhaus at Munich about Michelangelo
> whose sixtine chapel images where once overpainted because his figures
> appeared naked "as god created them".
That's why Michelangelo didn't design the new Python web site: because
Google wouldn't display it with SafeSearch turned on.
PJDM
robin
>While the new one is much better than the old website, the logo strikes
>me as awful.
I personally believe the new logo is miles better than the old one.
Whether you see snakes or a plus-sign or a yin-yang, it has a nice
harmonious look that still captures some playfulness.
Besides, why is everyone fixated on snakes? Python the language has
nothing to do with python the constrictor.
As far as the layout goes, I still find it too busy. Specifically
there are too many fonts on the one page. But I have already made that
point, and did an entire version of the homepage, which the team have
taken as input.
Anyone who has the time can do the same, rather than simply comment
from the sidelines. The best websites never stay still, but are
constantly evolving. I hope python.org can do the same, and go from
strength to strength.
Congratulations to all involved!
-----
robin
noisetheatre.blogspot.com
Roel Schroeven
> "Michael Tobis" <mto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> While the new one is much better than the old website, the logo strikes
>> me as awful.
> there are too many fonts on the one page. But I have already made that
> point, and did an entire version of the homepage, which the team have
> taken as input.
+1 on that. Last weekend I had a quick look at the stylesheet and
removed most of the font-style and font-size declarations. It made the
site look much better, IMO. If I can find a few spare minutes I might
try to do put a bit more effort in it and send it in.
--
If I have been able to see further, it was only because I stood
on the shoulders of giants. -- Isaac Newton
Roel Schroeven