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 #3 | Main | What Do You Think: Example #1 »

February 27, 2005

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345f854d69e200d8347280dd69e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What Do You Think: Example #2:

Comments

dwarb

I did not view this site as being very credible or useable. I based my opinion on the many highlighted links within the text. My experience tells me that I will be taken off the subject I am looking for.

Bryan Back

Wasn't an impressive website that caught your attention, but seemed o.k. They may have been there but I didn't readily see the sites sources, and the site looked relatively homeade or very low budget.

jeremy

I try not to judge a book by it's cover, but when I see sub-par design I associate the page with sub-par credibility. The info that I could see on the example looked good, but I couldn't get passed the design.

Chuck

Because the site seemed to be made by a single contributor it lost credibility for me right off the bat.

mlg

was not sure about this one, the available info seemed like it be more of a commercial site. what was the purpose or authenticity of the author?

David Tiley

A ten second response. Do I pass on or look deeper?

For me the ten second impulse was to say credible. I am not bothered by the amateurishness of the design, as long as the navigation is okay. It promised interesting collectors material and probably some good links.

The blurb about children both showed a lack of deep reading in the area, and a desire to be realistic about people which was a bit encouraging.

There is promise here but not certainty.

Debra Hutton

So who is "I"? Without any sort of credentials or real info about the author of the web page it is difficult to evaluate. It might be credible, but it's impossible to tell from this page alone. I also question its "homemade" appearance.

Carolyn Leck

Example #2 "Nineteenth-Century American Children and What They Read" was slightly less effective. The repeatation of the dolls was boring while the varying blue colors seem to blend together and become distracting. There was nothing on the page to grab and hold a reader's attention.

Steven Clark

I felt this site was not very crediable. It lacked dates and was written in first person. Not very professional.

John Seal

I felt this site could be used across the curriculum in the areas of literature and english it porvides a very detai\ailed look at what kid's read inthe 19th century and perhaps could give us some evidence as to what might have been expected in the early days of education. John s. in Kansas

Brian Ogilvie

The site states that it was written by a collector. There's nothing wrong with that, but the link "How much is your book worth?" makes me wonder whether the collector who wrote it is completely objective. Moreover, the claim in the text that "children have been children since the beginning of time" is true but useless; there's a large historiography on the changes in how childhood has been lived and understood. And the last line, "Here you will find bits and pieces..." doesn't make me confident that the author has done extensive research on the books and their historical context.

JP

I was not bothered by the set up of the page. The effect they were after was to show dimension. It is not colorful and eye-catching but it does have substance. After getting onto the site I found it very interesting. In this case you cannot judge the book by its cover.

Don Hageman

Not an overall good design like the others, but information was good.

Mindy A.

First reaction was to go on. Difficult to read, no links to a bib. Looked like something a student would set up.

Bill Wolff

I thought this site looked sort of credible though it was in my quick opinion a work of a person other than an organization.

Eddie K

This site did not catch my eye. It was not appealing, and did not look that it was professionally done.

Debbie Shaffer

At first glance this site did not look very professional. This would be a site that I would by-pass because it didn't look appealing enough to capture my attention.

Mike McEwan

There is nothing that states who is responsable for the work, where to find out sources, or where the work was found.

Mary C.

This site was difficult to judge. The layout did not look very professional. The background made it look cheap. There were though several links that could have made it authentic.

Greg Traxson

This site appeared to be a personal page and was somehow missing a professional look. The information may be good but I would not readily trust it.

A. Cephalous

The double-duty (foreground and background)done by the plate is amateurish. Not that the content would necessarily be so--in fact, there's reason to believe that serious scholars have neither the time to learn Dreamweaver nor the money to pay a professional to construct his/her site--but the visual appeal of a site is often an indication of the professionalism of its creator.

M. Ballard

Not easy on the eyes. Not sure info would be historically documented

Jeremy Neville

I saw a lot of dates in the text which made me think originally that the site could be credible, but as I read some of the text it becomes doubtful.

Brady

This site looked like it may be credible but I could not tell who made it. The design was good but I could not make a decision based on the design only.

Liz

This site was a little harder to judge. I thought that it was somewhat credible because it listed links to the people in the information, so their was more infomration being integrated into the site.

The comments to this entry are closed.