We are in the process of a website redesign with the intention to deliver a new look and feel in time for the ACS meeting. We have some draft pages available online and we would like YOUR feedback please!

We have five drafts of the Home page that we would like your comments on. Let us know which one is your favorite by giving us the number of your favorite when you comment as well as any other comments.

Home Page 1

Home Page 2

Home Page 3

Home Page 4 (static image)

Home Page 5 (static image)

The draft of our Chemical Record page is here:

Chemical Record Page

Comments and feedback welcome!

Stumble it!

16 Responses to “Feedback Requested on New Website Design”

  1. Markus Sitzmann says:

    Looks very nice – I also think navigation gets much clearer by this because it is moved from both horizontal and vertical like in the current version to only horizontal.

    But I would leave out the text between the blue navigation line and the grey searches box – I think this text lets the side look a bit cluttered. The searches box maybe could fill the space the text uses now (with a lot white space around) … just put the text into “About” :-)

  2. Chris says:

    Now working!

    I like Home Page 1, I prefer the adverts in a single column rather than interspersed within the text.

    The dropdown menus are better, but how many items do you plan to have in a dropdown menu in the future?

    Can you make the text below the search box “Systematic name….” a little darker, my fading eyesight struggled!

  3. Pete Scott says:

    I agree with Markus mostly, so my favourite is 4. The balance is much better than current site. Logo redesign/resize is very good and sits much better alongside RSC logo. I would not intersperse adverts with content. It’s perhaps a little late to consider this now, but is there not a case to mirror the design elements of the RSC websites?

  4. Jan Davies says:

    Hi

    I have a preference for Version 4.

  5. Elizabeth Brown says:

    My preference is in the following order: 4, 3, 5 2, 1. I like the balanced appearance in version 4 with the sponsor info at the bottom. It seems to frame the screen better than the other options. I think version 1 is too long (too much info past the first screen) and version 5 seems to break up the page info with the sponsor information.

  6. Antony Williams says:

    Email contribution from user:

    I see nothing of concern with the current home page. Of the new pages, # 1 is the cleanest. #2 and #3 have banners overlaying the advertisements. #4 and #5 looked horrible on my screen, poorly resolved text and images.

  7. Antony Williams says:

    Email contribution from user

    “The Homepage number 2 is the best”

  8. Will says:

    I prefer one column of content to look at – or as few as possible as I find it more readable. So my favourites are ’14.html’ and ’19.html’

  9. Antony Williams says:

    Feedback from a user

    “Antony:

    I like the page with all the ads and RSC graphics together (18.html) – it’s more likely I’ll look at them all.
    The wider display on the chemical record page is good.

  10. Wim Smets says:

    looks nice,
    I prefer 4 or 5 because they have the search bar on the top of the page. (that’s why i use chemspider … to search)

  11. Markus Sitzmann says:

    4 is nice :-) (which wasn’t there when I wrote my first comment)

  12. Justin Perry says:

    I prefer the fourth option. Search bar at the top, two content columns, and the adverts around the bottom and right sides (i.e. out of the way!)

  13. Antony Williams says:

    Feedback from user

    “Hi,

    For me home page 4 static look balanced.

    1. Header footer & body is perfectly balanced.
    2. Information, molecules of interest, blog & synthetic pages is placed perfectly.
    3. Sponsors are also has option to place the add at specific location.
    4. Navigation tool bar is perfectly placed.

  14. Antony Williams says:

    Feedback from user

    “I think I prefer the home page 4. It has the search box at the top so is more appealing to Google-generation (who isn’t part of that) users. Page 5 seems a little less balanced with the Gold Sponsors, etc., unaligned with other features.”

  15. Juin TeVrucht says:

    Homepage 4 gets my vote for the best design. It is asthetically pleasing as well as functional. The one change I would make on all of them is as “Chris” mentioned: make the writng below the search box darker.

  16. Martin Walker says:

    I picked no. 4 as my favourite. I also asked my wife, who has a fine arts degree and much more artistic sense than I do – and she liked no. 4 also! As for the new record page, I think that’s a definite improvement, too. Well done!

Leave a Reply