Like a lot of you, I’ve been following the mozilla.org redesign with great interest. Communicating the essence of a multi-faceted entity like Mozilla is never easy, and doing it in the open only adds to the complexity. But, it’s a long-overdue task and I love the way that David, Sam, Mark and Happy Cog have approached it with the RedesignMozilla.org site and the wiki and all the different calls for input.
So, in the interest of the continued public dialog, and with some prodding from David, here’s my two cents (I should note that I’m not directly involved with the project…am writing this only as an interested observer.):
Some Background Thoughts on the Design Process
It’s important to remember that the first round is only the initial step in a much longer process. It’s really more about throwing out ideas to see what works more than it is coming up with the perfectly polished design. There’s still plenty of time for refinement and detail, in other words.
I’ve seen several commenters write things like “I can’t believe this is the work of Happy Cog” (meant in a negative way). Of course, that’s because this is only the first round of comps and we’re used to seeing their final product…there’s a big difference!
For example, check out the Royal Order’s initial mockups of the mozilla.com redesign that I posted in December 2007 and compare them to the current live site (or just check out the side-by-side comparison). You can see the seeds of the final version in concept 1, but otherwise there was quite a bit of evolution along the way. That doesn’t mean the Royal Order or Happy Cog don’t know what they’re doing (far from it), that’s just how the process works.
Content is Key
One often underrated component of site design is the content itself. To use mozilla.com as an example again, that design didn’t really start coming together until we had a more solid idea of what the content would be (which, in turn, was spurred by us seeing the first round of comps). Right now the mozilla.org designs are suffering a bit because we don’t have our content strategy figured out yet.
In other words, if these mockups don’t feel like a finished product, a big reason is because the Happy Cog designers were just taking their best guess at what should be on the page. The key step now is for us to figure out what information we want to present. Once that happens, the design will really start to take shape…guaranteed.
But what should the information be? When building a site it’s important to make sure you have a clear primary message and a clear call to action (CTA) on the homepage…in other words, when people come to your site what do you want them to know and what do you want them to do next? Determining this can be a lot harder than it might sound.
For mozilla.org, it feels like the main message should be some derivation of the basic Mozilla principles of wanting to make the internet better for everyone. As for the CTA, is it a suggestion for people to get involved? Or learn more? Or something about developer tools? On mozilla.com, where the goal is to convince people to download Firefox, this was fairly simple, but this site is much broader-reaching so it’s trickier.
Finally, Some Specific Thoughts
After all that background explanation, here are a few specific comments on each of the potential design directions.
#1: There’s a nice simplicity and cleanliness to this approach that’s very pleasing to me. I like how there’s a prominent section explaining what Mozilla is, and exposing various elements of the Mozilla Manifesto is a nice touch. However, the header elements take up a huge amount of space before you get to the main content, and that asterisk is confusing. Also, as others have noted, having a North American-centric globe doesn’t fairly represent the incredibly international nature of the Mozilla project.
This is mainly a function of us not having a finished content strategy, but the main area needs to work a lot harder in terms of representing what’s going on in the Mozilla universe…everything from specific projects to general news, relevant blog posts, etc. I’d also love to see that part be structured in a more modular way so it can adapt to include cool future content…maybe an interesting video, or some variation of the Lizard Feeder community visualization that we’ve been discussing.
Lastly, I suspect that this design is a little *too* clean. Mozilla is an unconventional organization in almost every possible way, and the site design should embody that.
#2: This one definitely does a better job of capturing Mozilla’s personality…I like the rough edges and prominent use of the dino, and there’s a structure in place that would allow us to state our main messages very clearly. But, the height of the header area again feels a bit much, and the large 1-2-3 is very confusing to me (looks like 1-23). And like option #1, the content area needs to be rethought so we can get all our main points across and make the site as useful as possible for people.
#3: Some interesting ideas here, but this one feels the least promising to me. Making the site more interactive is definitely a cool touch, but right now it’s coming at the expense of the site being usable and easy to understand. Seems like it has a lot of capital-D Design, but not as much substance. I’m glad the designers are taking risks and trying some new things, but this one feels like too much of a departure.
Two Bonus Thoughts of a More General Nature
1. Regardless of which direction we go with, my main suggestion for round 2 would be to simplify things a bit. It’s not in Mozilla’s DNA to be particularly flashy or flamboyant, and I think all three options are currently leaning a bit too much in that direction. Obviously, once we add the more final content that will help a lot, but this is a site whose style needs to be in service of the substance. In other words, we need a design that’s well done and has personality, but a user’s first reaction on seeing the site should be something more like “wow, this looks like a project I want to get involved with/learn more about!” rather than “wow, cool design!”.
2. Another issue worth pondering is how this site fits together with mozilla.com. They have totally different purposes, but I think it’s important we consider how the two sites work together. We also should make sure that they’re not *so* different that we totally confuse someone checking out Mozilla for the first time. Not quite sure how to achieve this (maybe there’s some loose common visual ground or similar graphic element we can use), but we need to make sure both sites are complementing each other and working together in the right ways.
And In Conclusion…
Kudos to David, Sam and Mark for their management of this project, and especially to Happy Cog for their strong work so far and for being so open about their process. It can be a little painful for a designer to see their early stage stuff dissected in public, but I know the final product will be even better as a result. Can’t wait to see what round 2 looks like!
If you haven’t already weighed in with your feedback, definitely leave a comment over at the RedesignMozilla.org site. Big thanks to everyone who’s participated so far.