Print Design vs Web Design – Ten Years in the Future
I recently came across this excellent article by Jakob Nielson: http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990124.html
In the article, he discusses the differences between Print Design and Web Design. However, if you take a look at the date of the article, it was posted back in 1999, a full decade ago.
If you’re old enough to remember using computers 10 years ago, think of how different they are now then they were then. The web has also greatly evolved in much the same way. I’d like to take some time and go over points in his article that have changed since he first wrote the article.
Dimensionality
Nielson described print as being essentially 2-dimensional while web was simultaneously 1-dimensional and n-dimensional at the same time. I think this is a good description that still holds up today.
Just to clarify a bit, when he says “1-dimensional and n-dimensional” he’s referring to website primarily being vertically scrolling (1-dimensional) and that pages link with each other to form as many more dimensions (n-dimensional).
He mentions that precise placement of elements in web pages goes against the nature of HTML. While this is still technically true even now, it is less true then it was a decade ago. With proper design and coding, “pixel perfect” layouts are no entirely possible. This is one of the areas that has allowed lead to the vast improvement in the design of web pages from a decade ago. In this respect, web design has been moving ever closer to the same amount of control as print design (though still not there yet, and likely will never be unless there is a time when we have only one browser, which would be tragic).
Navigation
Nielson says that navigation in print is essentially just turning the page, whereas navigating in websites is what the web is all about. This statement is still just as true now as it was back then.
What has changed though is how we can navigate. In 1999, navigation was simple and limited: you clicked a hyperlink and went to another page. Nowadays we have technologies such as Flash, AJAX, and others which allow us to navigate without the use of a hyperlink. The means with which we now have to navigate are only limited by your imagination and programming ability.
Navigation has possibly become an even more essential role in web design than it was a decade ago.
Response Time, Resolution, and Canvas Size
This section is interesting because he talks about “in ten years”. Well, it’s been ten years, so let’s see how he did.
bandwidth fast enough to download a Web page as fast as one can turn the page in a newspaper
We pretty much have that now.
screen resolution sharp enough to render type so crisply that reading speed from screens reaches that of paper
Not quite yet, but getting there. There were some discussions not long ago comparing the readability of screens compared to that of print. Print still wins, but the gap is definitely narrowing and there are some high-end screens which you could say the difference is not noticeable.
huge screens the size of a newspaper spread – in fact, I think that newspaper-sized screens are about the limit where it may not make sense to make screens any larger
Kind of. Technically we have screens this large, but we very rarely (if ever) utilize them as computer screens.
For the next ten years or so, the differences will remain and will dictate restrictions on web design: less graphics, smaller graphics, shorter text (since it is unpleasant to read online), less fancy typography (since you don’t know what fonts the user has installed), and less ambitious layouts.
When it comes to the part about the images, this has become almost a non-issue because of our speed. At least, a non-issue when the images are properly sized and optimized (10000×10000 images at 300 dpi will still bog down even the faster connection).
We are almost there when it comes to the typography issue with the nearly complete usage of @font-face to allow us to embed whatever font we may want, as well as replacement techniques such as sIFR.
Nowadays our layouts can be as ambitious as we want, and generally done quite easily. I’ve yet to come across a layout mock-up where I’ve said “it can’t be done”. That was very different 10 years ago when the primary manner of laying out a web page was with the use of tables (a big no-no now).
As for the shorter text, this is a matter of debate. I’d say that in general you’d now want to follow about the same rules as print (instead of purposely being shorter). Many newspapers and magazines now publish their content, at full-length, online, so I’d say we’ve definitely improved in this area.
Even when we get perfect hardware in ten years, it will continue to be necessary to limit the word count since users are more impatient online and are motivated to move on. It will also be necessary to design web information for small-canvas layouts since portable devices will retain small screens even as we get huge screens in the office.
As far as the “impatient online”, I think this varies greatly, both on the person and on the content. I think however that this is probably a little more invalid than it is valid, but it’s a point that is under constant debate.
The small-canvas thing is definitely something that is true nowadays, with the heavy use of mobile internet usage. However, we have technologies now that allow us to differentiate between devices and give different versions of the content in order to view them best.
Multimedia, Interactivity, and Overlays
Web design definitely wins this area hands-down, thanks to Flash, Silverlight, and more. These areas have only improved in the last ten years.
However, what is the big change (compared to what Nielson said), is that print media is actually becoming more multimedia. There were some print magazines that embedded small video players which basically showed commercials (article about CBS’ version from Wired). While this is still a costly option and not very practical, it is showing where we are heading in this area.
Also, with the continuing advancements of eBooks, the line between print and digital becomes even more blurred.
Respect (no, Relish) the Differences
This is the one area that I greatly disagree with Nielson, in this article. He says “Anything that is a great print design is likely to be a lousy web design.” Nowadays I don’t believe this is true. In fact, I hear more from designers discuss how a lot of people that only define themselves as “web designers” forget about their print roots and neglect a lot of universal design rules.
He also says this:
Current web designs are insufficiently interactive and have extremely poor use of multimedia. It is rare to see a web animation that has any goal besides annoying the user.
Print design is highly refined, as evidenced by glancing through the recent book of award-winning designs. Web design is impoverished because too many sites strive for the wrong standards of excellence that made sense in the print world but do not make sufficient advances in interactivity.
While this may have been true back then (and trust me, the animation thing was), I find it insulting that he says print is “highly refined” and web design is “impoverish”. This is strictly down to the individual. I have seen plenty of print designs that are an absolute travesty and I have seen web designs that wouldn’t look out of place framed and hanging on your wall. I think that is even more true now then it was a decade ago.
My Thoughts
I wanted to do an article on the differences between Print and Web design, but when I came across this article it was too tempting not to write this piece. I have been working on websites since around 1996 or 1997, so I’ve been doing this since that article was written. I can say from personal experience that the Internet has changed at a remarkable pace and some of the things I do on a daily basis and take for granted (like writing a blog article), were barely imaginable back then.
As time goes on, I think the line between print and web (both in design and in actual use) will continue to be blurred, possibly until they become one (though that is likely many decades away). Print design is something that has ancient origins, while web design has only existed for about a decade. However, design is design, and regardless of the media, sometimes what looks good just looks good.
Your Thoughts
What do you think? Do you think Nielson did justice in his article? Do you think I did his article and the present justice? Where do you see things moving in the future?
