IBM's Take On Web 2.0
Yesterday on Digg there was a post called How to Design Great Looking Web 2.0 Websites, which reffered to this page, called Current Web Style. The article contains examples of typical Web 2.0-style sites. Whether you think it's a good thing or not there's a definite look to Web 2.0 sites which sets them apart from others — big fonts, gentle gradients, clever use of whitespace etc.
Depending on how you interpret it, Web 2.0 can mean many things. To some it's merely a technology thing. To others it's a whole new way of thinking about web development. Personally I don't really care for the term "Web 2.0" itself, but I really like this new wave of simple yet attractive sites. It's exciting to think what the future holds for web applications.
Anyway, this article reminded me of one I'd seen on IBM's developerWorks earlier in the week called Developing a Web 2.0 client for IBM Lotus Domino. At first I was really excited that IBM themselves were going to show us how to create great-looking next-wave web applications using Domino. However, a quick skim of the article and I see the demo site, which looked like this:
It couldn't be less Web 2.0 if it tried. Sure, the article talks about using Ajax, but that's where this demo stops having anything to do with Web 2.0. Web 2.0 is about so much more than Ajax. Web 2.0 is as much about the user experience as the technology used. This IBM demo shows no thought whatsoever for the user interface. The interface looks like it's been cobbled together merely to show how Ajax can work with Domino. Read the article in more depth and you're left wondering why you'd want to do what they're doing in the first place.
It's a shame that when IBM sponsor an article about Domino and Web 2.0 it's such a poor example. It would have been nice if they really went to town and produced bells-n-whistles proof that Domino isn't the dinosaur it's often perceived as. Releasing demos like this just lends to the idea that nothing Domino will ever look good. Web 2.0? It's more like Domino 2.0!
Skip to the 
You can subscribe to an individual
Hi Jake...
As per usual..... the guys at IBM create another brutal example for us!
Imagine trying to show people how great Domino is... With examples like this, they are shooting themselves in the foot.
Why the hell don't them start to create real world applications for us to use?
Later
Patrick
P.S. I suppose we all cannot complain. They're lack of desire in this area is keeping us in a job!
Here's our attempt at creating a blog template using XML, XSL and style sheets...
{Link}
Of course you need to subscribe to "TheView" to get the 26 page article, but the demo is free to download.
andy
notes411.com
From the article:
"The technologies and concepts supporting a Web 2.0 style of application are:
* Latest generation of Web browsers (Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Internet Explorer 7, and so on)
* AJAX
* JavaScript
* DHTML
* REST (REpresentational State Transfer, an architectural style on which the Web itself is based)"
Now I understand. They forgot to include a CSS! :D
Absolutely. The new Sony Bravia's Ad is more Web 2.0.
Making Domino sites look good sexy or even lickable is just a matter of CSS styling, no? They just haven't discovered CSS Zen Garden yet.
For me Web 2.0 is more about a new application architecture and Ajax is about improving the user experience. My blog template was made in a few hours, using only standard Notes forms, views and a few @formulas. I use Ajax only to enhance the page after it's loaded. Why use DXL if you can do it with simple Notes, and do it faster too :-)
If you want an example of a Domino application that is most definitely in the Web 2.0 camp, then poke your browser over to {Link}
And before you yell at me "Thats not Domino", I can most definitely assure you that it is 100% all singing, all dancing, Domino throughout.
They forgot more than including CSS. They forgot to think about anything other than how to show Ajax in use with Domino. A more suitable title might have been "A Pointless Exercise in Using Ajax With Domino And Then Using Buzzwords To Get You To Read It".
I almost blogged about the exact same issue. Truly a sad example of IBM yet again ignoring the UI.
Still, somebody COULD take their code and make a pretty UI on top of it. Show them how it really ought to be done. Any takers?
PS Dragon: Very nice work on that site - I presume it's yours?
Jake. Note the article's subtitle:
"This article shows you how to extend your Notes/Domino applications with Ajax".
I think they just mislaid some articles :D
Rob. Not much point improving that code. It's an HTML file that sits on a Domino server and interacts with Domino data. WHY!? Any time would be much better spent on something other venture.
@Jake: My theory was that it might be interesting to show IBM what they did wrong. They provided an MVC implementation of accessing Domino data in a browser. It just so happens that their UI is pathetic.
In any event, that article makes Domino look bad. That bugs me, because it's not Domino's fault that IBM didn't bother to design a decent UI for that article. I can't even design a blog (I stole my template from The Style Contest), or I'd take a shot at fixing it.
If I could point out something good that came out of the article, it's that it is getting Notes/Domino people talking about how important UI is in designing an application. Everyone here is spot on...it's not the technology that really matters...it's how you implement it to create a really compelling user experience.
As Domino developers, it seems we are always trying to justify why the product is not irrelevant. The best way we can do that is to demonstrate sites that focus on helping the user get things done rather than what wizbang, hyped up technology we can use. Yes, "Web 2.0" technologies are awesome tools for our toolbox, but we must use them in the appropriate way and that means we must place a renewed focus on UI design!
Web 2.0 is all about a line in the sand. For so many years web designers have been limited by the threat that someone with an ancient browser might not be able to use their site. This line in the sand says: "We are moving forward, if you want to follow, go download a free upgrade!".
Yes the interface looks yucky, but if I mock up a "Basecamp" lookalike on my Domino server does that make it web 2.0?
What I would find useful is some definitive points as to *why* one site looks good and another bad and what basic steps we can take to achieve the desired goal.
As usual, IBM is leaving it up to a handful of A-team bloggers to show us the way on how to bring Domino to the current standards. There should be a supported YUI style set of tools for Domino available from IBM by now. Yeah, yeah, yeah - we know the standard answers from IBM; too busy with Hannover, backward compatibility and internationalization issues... When they do deliver it you can bet that the first step will involve installing websphere portal. :-(
omg, that is just sad!
Jack,
Though it is a somewhat poor example, when coming to AJAX. In my opinion it is a good thing that IBM is finally shining a light on using DXL in a combo with web browsers.
I still hope getting to the point of designing something with the notes client, that will actually work and look good in a web-browser.
I know what your saying on the UI - but the article is not about UI its about methods - web2.0 methods at that (web2.0 is more about methods than UI - right?)
Too much critique on the look will prevent people "daring" to produce further articles on these subjects - I for one can not design a UI for toffee but could code up anything to demonstrate web2.0. Should my ui design skills get in the way of helping to educate others?
What about the methods in the article - are they useful?
Steve. Is Web 2.0 more about methods than UI? I'm not so sure. To me the UI is as important as methods used if you want to badge something "Web 2.0". You at least need to think about the UI and layout of the page, which it doesn't look like they did. You don't have to be a graphics whizz (something I'm not) to make a good looking site. Even without the graphics you can make it look nice wih simple CSS, thoughtful font choice and an educated page layout.
God, that's the worst UI example...are we back in 1996?
Jake has done a nice job of providing us a stock template with the Yahoo UI WebDAV'd in already.
{Link}
I'm working with it at the moment to create something more client - server like than website architecture would typicall give, using ajax of course.
I think it's helpful to apply that label, Client-Server, when thinking about effective Web 2.0 design. People have been cultured to thing in terms of "click to follow link", "click to submit form" on the web. Looking at usability and use cases for client-server apps reveals a wealth of UI - data interaction models that ajax is great for.
Putting it to GOOD use is the challenge now. I've got this nice hammer and just need to find a willing and proper nail now.
Hi Jake - you know, I have to concede a little.
I looked around for some definitions - the best I found was on wikipedia {Link} - with a graphic with lots of definitions floating around a "web2.0".
The main words:
Participation
Convergence
Remixability
Standardization
Economy
Usability !
Design !
Jake,
but honestly, how many developers actually designed the UI/graphics on the sites mentioned on that website? (Mozilla, Iomega, just to name a few). From what I've seen, it's common practice to have web designers develop the UI/interface, and developers code the... "page"/web app.
I can agree that perhaps they could've used "AJAX" instead of "Web 2.0" on the article, but truth be told very few developers are good designers, and vice-versa.
For the site's audience, developers (not designers), the article (which was written by someone from IBM, but could've been written by anyone, all they have to do is submit the content) hits pretty much the target audience.
For good looking web designs, designers go elsewhere, not developerWorks. ({Link} , for instance).
I agree that we need better looking "examples" of Domino based sites, but the UI is rarely done by developers at least in the big shops.
Just my 2 cents.
Cheers,
Daniel
mmmm ... Daniel .... good point... but you would be suprise how many developers design sites like that article.
Using good Dhtml/css/ui library techniques you can develope great functional and secure sites, much more atractive and 20x faster development than a .net project.
Web 2.0 concerns UI and unfortunately, developers and examples like that article bring the Notes down, not to mention IBM's lousy marketing.
No wonder many companies are switching...
You have to remember this is the same company that brought us the Notes client interface. This is sad knowing that there is so much you can do with Notes and Domino in terms of the UI not just for the Web but also the Notes client. Doesn't IBM understand by now that the UI is extremely important when you are selling a product to business users?
One should remember that when we refer to the UI we are not only referring to how 'pretty' it is....but also the usability and functionality of the site. UI is as much the aesthetic nature of the site as the basic logic/usability of the site (i.e. can this user figure how to navigate and use the site in as little time as possible). I had the same impressions when I first saw the article - 'this is a web 2.0 article?' I am no graphics expert myself, but I believe i can create a clean, simple to use site.
Not surprised at all taking into account what a view looks like in the default way.
One who is not familar with Domino might wonder why there are people developing web applications with Domino after viewing the rendered html transfered by the web engine.It's still in the primitive status of first generation websites.