Design Tools

  • Blogger (Mac & Win)
    Excellent blogging tools that is free; must use Flickr to create a photo album; excellent range of professional designs.
  • Bubbler (Mac & Win $)
    A beta blogging tool that offers a number of creative feature and possibilities; lightning fast and very flexible; built-in photo album; a nice array of professional templates.
  • Flickr
    Photo sharing at its best; can be linked to a variety of blog application; excellent commenting and tagging; slideshow facility.
  • RapidWeaer (Mac $)
    A clever next-generation website creation application that is almost WYSIWYG; its blogging component lacks a commenting facility
  • Streetprint
    An excellent application for creating an archive of images or images of documents; can be collaborative; substantial user manual with good technical advice; installation may be a bit challenging.
  • StyleMaster (Mac & Win)
    Really a CSS style sheet generator but its Wizards produce competent, standards-compliant web pages; more useful for a website rather than a blog or photo album; must know what you're doing
  • Textpattern (Mac & Win)
    An elegant blog tool (or content management system) that will be going to version 1.0; photo album as plug-in; installation may be challenging; exceptional customization; templates available from 3rd parties.
  • TypePad (Mac & Win $)
    One of the most well-developed and fexible blogging tools; includes a photo album at Level 2 subscription; excellent professional designs.
  • WordPress (Mac & Win)
    Popular and fexible blogging tool with a variety of plug-ins; photo-album plug-in available; installation may be challenging although several hosting services provide 1-click installation; a variety of templates available.

« What Do You Think: Example #4 | Main | What Do You Think: Example #2 »

February 27, 2005

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345f854d69e200d834727e3d69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What Do You Think: Example #3:

Comments

dwarb

This site looks like you can hone in on a specific topic.

Bryan Back

the site looked official, but lacks reputation, at least with myself. Links to other more publicized sites or direct links to site sources would be an improvement to promote it credibility or lack thereof.

jeremy

The first thing that I look for on any website is who they are affiliated with. Even though I don't know too much about the Schonburg Center, I can take solace in knowing that somewhere out there someone put enough faith in the designer to help produce the site.

Chuck

For some reason the word "institute" in the title of a site comes across as more official. Also, links to other resources, and sources lend cridibility. The builders of the site make it possible for the user to cross reference their info.

mlg

thought would be a credible site. seemed more educational.

David Tiley

Politically correct with money. And I am a card carrying lefty.

Ironically, the navigation is probably pretty good, but the use of images, as pointed out above, does absolutely nothing.

What do we mean by "credibility"? The issue is emerging from the comments. Yes, I would accept the facts from this site because it is "respectable", but I would wonder if the stories woven were too simplistic. Heroic, perhaps?

When I read the text I was reaching for my editor's pencil. That first para is a constipation special - and irrelevant.

Debra Hutton

I admit I cheated on this one. I loved the look and the topic is definately different so I wanted to believe it was credible, but I had never heard of the research center. My "research" found that it was tied to National Geographic so I tend to trust it. It would be nice if they would mention this upfront to help us poor souls in search of quality information!

Carolyn Leck

Example #3 The title "In Motion " fit this page very well. The various pictures of differnet sizes seem to almost be moving and jump out at the viewer.

Steven Clark

The research infomation and the tabs were influential in my decision of high credibility.

John Seal

This is one of the best sites I have seen for use in the classroom to show the progression of African american History in the U.S.-John Seal

Brian Ogilvie

I know the reputation of the Schomburg Center from colleagues and students who have worked there. And the number of links in the upper left both fit what I know about the subject and suggests an awareness that the African-American diaspora is a complex subject with many historical moments. It looks credible to me.

JP

I looked for this site on the internet but could not call it up. There were 3 sites that listed "Schornburg Center for Research in Black Culture" as a place but not a site.
The color was appealing. The pictures could have had captions with them. It looked authentic and credible but I can't find it!?
It may be one of my DUH moments though.

Don Hageman

Not too sure I'd use thissite--sort of confusing.

Don Hageman

I would probably go with this site due to good layout and color.

Mindy A.

Ok, but not my favorite, I would have probably kept on going.

Bill Wolff

Quick glance I though this was a credible site do to its layout and organization.

Eddie K

This site did seem appealing to me. It seemed to credible to me. It The site is sponsored by a research center. I would use this site.

Debbie Shaffer

This site looks like a credible site to use for research. The blue background colors and the display of pictures caught my attention. I thought it looked professional.

Mike McEwan

Was appealing to the eye, easy to navigate, also had a place to find sources and who was responsable for the information.

Mary C.

The colors and layout on this site were nice. There were different parts of the site at the top that made it look nice and authentic. But there was just something about it that made me question it.

Greg Traxson

Much like example #1, I notice the affiliation to the research organization and the overall appearance is that it is professional and well planned.

A. Cephalous

I'm inclined to distrust this site for the very reason others indicated they'd trust it: the name of an unfamiliar research institution always sets off warning bells. It wasn't until I looked more closely and saw that this institution was affiliated with the Congressional Black Caucas that I felt comfortable with its content. That said, whether I or any other random surfer has heard of a particular institution shouldn't factor into decisions about how worthy a site is. As I mentioned about #1, I didn't even see the Smithsonian logo, but the overall quality of the site screamed respectability. This example tries to muster a scream but manages little more than a yowl. Large areas of wasted white space detract from a site's credibility.

M. Ballard

Have never heard of the organization. Site looks professional, but not sure. I would explore this site and check sources

Jeremy Neville

This site is supported by a museum, so it seems like it would be credible to me.

Liz

The first thing that jumped out at me was the research logo, of Schamburg Center for Research in Black Culter. This led me to believe that the site was credible. However I have never heard of this site so therefore it could be a false research logo. But it seemed organized, and had lot so of information as well.

The comments to this entry are closed.