Marketing Message for Calligra

[Adam C.]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 21:41:23 +0100, Jaroslaw Staniek <staniek at kde.org>  
wrote:

> On 22 December 2011 15:13, Adam C. <nospam at xibo.at> wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:04:28 +0100, Jaroslaw Staniek <staniek at kde.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 22 December 2011 12:51, Adam C. <nospam at xibo.at> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> to me the design looks a little bit like hastily cobbled together. the
>>>> elements are not aligned, there is no contrast and the different font
>>>> types
>>>> are fighting each other.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for the notes.
>>> Please help to improve the alignment by pointing what exactly can be
>>> aligned better.
>>>
>>> If you see 2 or 3 pixels misalignment please read the entire email -
>>> this is a mockup that even uses uselicensed graphics, btw.
>>
>> i've read the mail, thanks for the hint, but it's not just a few pixels.
>> here i tried to display, what i mean:
>> http://wstaw.org/m/2011/12/22/not_aligned.png
>>
>> note that it's not only misalignment, but also the lack of contrast.
>
> this is a svn mockup - your points help me to improve it
>
> Please propose proper place for the 'what is calligra?' item - it
> should stay exposed though.
>
> BTW - yes, installation is important, it is not about downloading an
> exe file - it's a link to page like
> http://www.calligra.org/get-calligra/ which explains all deployment
> methods but in better way (that page is a curiosity for me because of
> the geeky links within the sentences).

is it more important than the 'what is calligra?'
i showed you already a proposal for it, (see my mockup) in the menu at the  
top (unlike in my mockup, the text should be all the same font).

>
>> ah, ok. without body i only count 5 fonts. imo a different font colour,
>> style, size and boldness is also a different font (to some extend).  
>> well,
>> ok. it's rather like 'big differneces are ok, but small not'.
>> http://wstaw.org/m/2011/12/22/fonts.png
>
> This is a mockup, if you spot differences this is because there's no
> CSS used, just svg texts, consider all this fixed; and one thing:
> either you have align at the cost of font sizes or you have the same
> font sizes and misalignment.
>
> Single font was used for the top area and two weights.
>
>> i'm not against 3 navigation levels, but for me the mockup looks a  
>> little
>> bit messy (no offence). the article is quite old btw (2003) and i guess,
>> there are other articles, which say, that less navigation is better.
>
> Yes but this may be possible by removing content or having separate
> sites. Translates to more clicks and surprises.

not necessarily surprises, but imo we should hide unimportant information.

>
>>>> of course also i am not a designer, but we had some lessons in  
>>>> university
>>>> on
>>>> this topic, so i tried to quickly stick something together.
>>>> http://wstaw.org/m/2011/12/22/calligrahp__.png
>>>
>>>
>>> nice too, but I also see misalignment here and these 3 levels of
>>> navigation...
>>
>>
>> can you point?
>
> Screenshots on the banner are randomly placed.
> Even more important these are all of various sizes (creative chaos?)
> so because there are many of them they are small and thus there's just
> a lot of black and white noise instead of readable text. I always

indeed. there should be something more catchy. we have seen some good  
examples on this thread.

> wonder why to publish screenshots this way instead of simplify the
> screenshots using this technique
> (http://kexi-project.org/screenshots.html) that I practice already
> over 10 years - or use any other equivalent technique.
>
> Just using symbols (as in my desktop/tablet/... buttons) if symbols
> are enough, do not clutter. This is like in marketing - using symbolic
> sentences like 'free' instead of geeky open source/libre one is able
> to deliver the message to the other audiences.
>


-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/