Please note: This site's design is only visible in a graphical browser that supports Web standards, but its content is accessible to any browser or Internet device. To see this site as it was designed please upgrade to a Web standards compliant browser.
 
Signal vs. Noise

Our book:
Defensive Design for the Web: How To Improve Error Messages, Help, Forms, and Other Crisis Points
Available Now ($16.99)

Most Popular (last 15 days)
Looking for old posts?
37signals Mailing List

Subscribe to our free newsletter and receive updates on 37signals' latest projects, research, announcements, and more (about one email per month).

37signals Services
Syndicate
XML version (full posts)
Get Firefox!

Coudal: We're jealous

29 Jun 2004 by Jason Fried

Our friends, officemates, purveyors of Jewelboxing, and rent collectors at Coudal Partners have launched their long awaited redesign (known as “4”). And it’s a beauty. Big headlines (I see a trend coming — of course its already been there in print), “widescreen” photos, color schemes and link colors that change based on the primary image palette, and a calming balance of black and white. And don’t forget the real key — the great copywriting and engaging links. Yes, we’re jealous. Well done fellas.

38 comments so far (Post a Comment)

29 Jun 2004 | Brendan said...

My only complaint is that "Fresh Signals", my main motivation for visiting Coudal daily is now squished in the a center narrow column. I wish it had a more prominent location.

29 Jun 2004 | mindful_learner said...

The new layout gives a strong impression of space. It seems to open up the page, which in turn gives a refreshing quality to the design. The pages almost feel as if you are looking at paper pages on a broadsheet newspaper. Oddly enough, this effect even holds on my crappy, small laptop screen which demands a little horizontal scrolling.

As widescreen monitors become more common, I look forward to many more expansive designs such as this.

Mindful

30 Jun 2004 | phil said...

I find it hard to read. The headlines are a bit extreme and the paragraphs in the center column could use a bit more space between them.

30 Jun 2004 | Justin French said...

I don't get it. They've stepped outside the "765px layout" like we alll want to, but they've only stepped out by a mere 70px. What a waste!

I feel like they've "broken" the layout for the ubiquitous 800x600 user, but are 'wasting' all that new found space (an extra 224 pixels on a 1024) like opening a whole 6-pack of Coopers Sparkling at once, but only drinking 5.

Yes, the space might be part of the design (and I love space), but they've ditched the 800x600 crowd without really gaining much.

30 Jun 2004 | Joe Murphy said...

Hey Justin --
I don't know the answer here either, but how many people browse at 1024x768 and larger resolutions with their browser maximized? I'd bet a much smaller percentage than those at the 600x800 resolution ...

30 Jun 2004 | Ian said...

I, for one, can't stand browsing at anything but full screen at 1280x1024. There's nothing particularly special about the desktop that I need to see it and with the years since the advent of tabbed browsing, switching between different pages hasn't been easier. Aslo, if you need to switch between programs, thats what a taskbar and alt-tab is for.

30 Jun 2004 | ~bc said...

Beautiful. But it lacks one major requirement now-a-days for anything regularly updated: RSS. Really disappointed about that.

30 Jun 2004 | Ian Firth said...

Broken in IE 6. The right column ends up at the bottom of the page. Oh yeah, no one uses IE 6. :)

30 Jun 2004 | Matt Pennell said...

Broken in IE6 for me, too - how is it possible to not test for that??

30 Jun 2004 | mark said...

im not a fan, the white is just too damned white, its like the bad ol days of web design... and k10k rave about the use of big type, i preferred the old simplebits style of presentation over this whish just looks way too messy.

30 Jun 2004 | waynep said...

They absolutely left the few million remaining users of 800x600 behind. (About 60% of the people in my office use that resolution on 17" CRT monitors.)

As for the reason to not browse maximized, I run 1280x1024 and never maximize anything but photoshop. I need to see the corners of all the open apps to quickly switch.

30 Jun 2004 | jh said...

Firefox 0.9/Win shows very dark headlines and black text on a black background. Can't see anything at all.

30 Jun 2004 | Coudal said...

New rule for developing: Do not tweak "a little thing here" and "a column width there" while at home overnight. Especially if you only have a simple Mac/Saf setup at home and can't properly test various OS and browser combinations there. Came in this morning to find out that I had made a mess of the way the site renders on IE for Win, etc. Lesson learned. Or it will be, as soon as I'm done repairing the damage. -j

30 Jun 2004 | Jamie said...

The main problem with using big serif non-monospaced headlines in CSS is the fact that you can't really kern (or can you? I'm not a CSS expert.). The weird spacing occurs with the captial "T's".

I think the most interesting thing about this design (which no one really mentioned) is the fact that it is a site for a design firm. You would never guess based on their unconventional layout stressing the importance of articles rather than their client work. It's actually easier to learn more about their Jewelboxing product than their client services. Is it working for you guys? I hope so!

30 Jun 2004 | Mike said...

Well I think it looks great. The capitalized Gill Sans with some letter-spacing is a great usage of that typeface that I've never seen before. Great job!

30 Jun 2004 | El Cowboy said...

That cover image is bad. What's that orange strip all about? And the cowboys? Certainly a "redesigned website" isn't a new frontier.

30 Jun 2004 | Two Cents said...

You would never guess based on their unconventional layout stressing the importance of articles rather than their client work

I agree with you, Jamie. But Coudal's site has turned into a blog for the industry, so this approach is designed around that audience. They could make it easier to find out who they are and what they do for potential clients and new visitors (a link above the artwork next to the logo?). The current link to that is buried in the content and hard to find.

30 Jun 2004 | but that's just me said...

I agree with Jamie. The home page gives no indication of the purpose of the site. It looks spiffy and everything and the copywriting is pretty witty, but if they're trying to promote their company, it's just not doing the job.

30 Jun 2004 | Randy said...

but if they're trying to promote their company, it's just not doing the job.

Let's see... They've been in business, what, 10+ years? How long have you been in business? I suspect they know what they are doing.

30 Jun 2004 | huphtur said...

im kinda feelin it. 2 little remarks though:
- they forgot to set the body background color to white.
- eventhough stats show that most people use a 1024 reso. doesnt mean they browse fullscreen. so im kinda bummed on the width.

30 Jun 2004 | Jamie said...

Hi all. Just to clarify... I meant to point out that it was interesting that they chose to go (and have always chosen...it hasn't changed with the redesign) with putting articles/blogs/jewelboxing in front of their client services. Read: Interesting. Not bad, not good, just something to note that not a whole lot of people are doing out there. I hope it works for them too!

Remember, we're on 37signals.com/svn having this discussion and NOT 37signals.com the company website. It's interesting eh?

30 Jun 2004 | but that's just me said...

You don't have to get huffy, Randy. All I'm saying is that if someone who had never heard of them looked at their site, I don't think they'd know what they do. If they don't want or need to use the site to promote their company, then kudos to them. I just always assume that companies want to bring in more clients, even if they are already successful. Silly, silly me.

30 Jun 2004 | Brad Hurley said...

I just always assume that companies want to bring in more clients, even if they are already successful

Actually, though, I think the site works for that too. Instead of being like every other design firm's site, Coudal's says (to me), "here's a bunch of intelligent, articulate, and creative folks whose interests range far and wide. They aren't narrowly focused on design; they're likely to get the bigger picture of what I need." I think the site would attract a certain subset of potential clients who value those qualities. And those are probably the kind of clients that Coudal is looking for anyway.

30 Jun 2004 | shopping around said...

Hey, where can I get a professional logo done for less than $250?

30 Jun 2004 | but that's just me said...

Thank you, Brad, for refuting my opinion the nice way. Honestly, I'm new to this industry (a writer, not a designer or programmer, who is learning more every day about creating practical sites). My viewpoint was literally from someone who doesn't know much about Coudal. Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers here. Just putting in my two, apparently ignorant, cents.

30 Jun 2004 | Jamie said...

but that's just me, your opinions and perspectives are totally valid! Don't let the trolls get you down!

30 Jun 2004 | Brad Hurley said...

My viewpoint was literally from someone who doesn't know much about Coudal.

Which is usually the most valuable viewpoint of all when considering whether a Web site communicates what its designers intended. Ignorance is a virtue, don't knock it!

I totally agree that a visitor to this site would have a hard time telling that Coudal is a design firm. But I guess what I'm saying is, it feels to me that the site isn't really intended to be Coudal's "cyber shingle." Advertising the firm's services seems like only a small part of what the site is about.

30 Jun 2004 | but that's just me said...

I totally understand. Like I said, if the firm doesn't necessarily need the site to bring in new clients, more power to 'em. In that case, it is an effective site for its purpose. Now back to the really important things (bottom of the 8th, tied at two, 2 outs, Cubs have bases loaded...)

30 Jun 2004 | JF said...

Like I said, if the firm doesn't necessarily need the site to bring in new clients, more power to 'em.

I think you keep missing the point. The site does bring in new clients -- the exact type of clients that Coudal is looking for. I can't stress enough how important this is to building a successful business. The people you work with OUTSIDE are as important as the people you work with INSIDE. Coudal's site attracts like-minded clients.

30 Jun 2004 | Two Cents said...

So it's okay to make something less usable and harder to find in this particular case =P

01 Jul 2004 | Clark MacLeod said...

For whatever reason the site seems harder to read now. It wasn't a bastion of readability before either. I never quite understood the purpose of the site but always appreciated the work that went into the site and always enjoyed fresh signals. If this actually does more than provide a creative outlet for them and actually brings in new business than that's really cool.

01 Jul 2004 | but that's just me said...

Why do I all of a sudden feel like a complete idiot? I suppose I just should have stayed out of this one.

02 Jul 2004 | Jamie said...

One thing. Why is it that the images accompanying the articles aren't clickable? I find the images more attractive to click on than the colored text link.

03 Jul 2004 | Arturo said...

How about a search function?

07 Jul 2004 | Coudal said...

Done Jamie.

07 Jul 2004 | Jamie said...

Jim, thanks for listening to the feedback. Much better!

23 Feb 2005 | home insurance rate said...

home owner insurance quote home insurance quote term life insurance quote online online insurance quote auto insurance rate quote health insurance quote free auto insurance quote health insurance online quote life insurance quote free car insurance quote home insurance quote term insurance rate auto insurance rate quote term insurance rate online auto insurance quote uk online car insurance quote life insurance rate auto insurance rate free auto insurance quote health insurance quote

Comments on this post are closed

 
Back to Top ^