Similarities Between Sites

Jul 3, 01:41 AM - and

And then comes the irony. I think, and maybe I’m being imaginative with this, that if I screencapped twenty websites of the web gurus, greyscaled them and put them next to eachother, it would be hard to tell the difference. Because they look the same, just fatter and thinner versions of each other. They have a header at the top, a content box on either the left or right, and a side bar. And usually a nice appreciative link to Wordpress at the bottom.
Why Do You Care?

You know me, never one to back down from a challenge so I decided to gather up a few sites from a certain circle and compare them to one another. Instead of the twenty suggested by Callie I decided to go with only eight because twenty seemed to be overkill. I’ve screencapped all these sites and desaturated them, if you want to see the full colour version then click the links to each site.

Scribblescratch.com

scribblescratch

Scribblescratch is exactly the sort of layout that Callie was talking about. Two columns, a header and even a link to Wordpress at the bottom. Why is it different from, oh say, mine? The header, the way the headers are styled, the flickr pictures in the sidebar, the navigation, the date styles, comments… I could go on but I think you get my point.

Now if you’re talking about disabling images or even styles you might have a point. Then the differences between sites becomes less apparent than if styles or images are enabled. Even if images are disabled then you still have colours that will set apart the sites from other, similar sites. And if the way the colour scheme is set up is identical to another site then that’s good old fashioned theft and for the purposes of this article I assumed that theft didn’t count.

Dubious.nu

dubious

Note the cute illustration at the top, the about the author snippet that spans the width of the two columns beneath it and the two columns beneath the author snippet. If you compare Dubious to Scribblescratch you’ll find that whilst the two do share similarities, the titles, dates, comments, navigation and so forth are all styled differently. Enough so that if you disabled images you’d be able to tell the difference between the two with relative ease. Oh and let’s not forget that all important link to Wordpress at the bottom!

Eyeare.nu

eyeare

I chose this layout to represent all one-column layouts everywhere, even though Callie didn’t mention one-column layouts in her original rant. One must assume that if a two-column layout with a header and a link to Wordpress at the bottom is oh-so-very generic then a one-column layout must be much more unique and original. Except it’s not really, in fact, the sidebar content has been moved to the footer (alongside that all important link to Wordpress). The only difference that you might notice while browsing the site is having to scroll to reach content that would otherwise be in the sidebar. Not that it’s a bad thing, this is one of those layouts that does it well, but my point is that dropping the standardized two column layout with a header isn’t necessarily a recipe for success and that a lot of the times it will still resemble those icky generic layouts that we all know and hate. Would the layout be any better or worse if the “sidebar” was moved up next to the content? Would that make a difference on how “original” the layout is? Personally I don’t think so.

Jemjabella.co.uk

jemjabella

Ah, the yet undisputed queen of “boring” layouts. Apparently we all copy her because we share a brain and don’t have any originality. Note the use of a “double” header of sorts, one wide header overlaying the smaller header that is the same size as the container. The placement of the header text is quite a bit different from the three sites linked above as are the styles for the header, sidebar, date and comments. Not to mention the navigation, note how each link is spaced out in comparison to the other three.

Neonglow.net

neonglow

None of the sites I’ve linked in this article have this set up and yet it still has the same “generic” set up that Callie mentioned. What gives? The titles in the sidebar, the dates and the welcoming excerpt at the top all make the site different from any other site listed here. Surely this is a fluke? It must be. Oh and Brent decided to be super unique and not use Wordpress. He’s such a rebel.

Wildx.org

wildx

Since I linked Alex I thought I should link another one-column theme that moves the sidebar beneath the content area and what better than wildx.org? It shares the same basic setup that Alex’s site has, but you’d be hardpressed to find the two similar in any other way. Compare the navigations, the titles and even the way the footers are set up and you’ll be pleasantly surprised to discover that in spite of all those damn similarities, they each hold their own.

Chiklita.net

chiklita

Dubious and Chiklita have similar titles, beyond that I’m hardpressed to find any other similarities in spite of the generic set up. The header with the flickr images in it is the first thing you notice whereas on Dubious the girl is the focal point of the layout. If you direct your attention to the footer you’ll notice that Sarai doesn’t use Wordpress. That must mean her site is actually really unique, right? Except it’s probably not, there are other sites out there that look like it and there will continue to be sites that resemble it in some ways. The key words being in some ways.

Babblative.com

babblative

What? I couldn’t leave myself out of all the fun, after all I used to get all these people ranting about how my site looks like a generic Wordpress blog (I guess they finally started checking the footer?) Why is my site different? I use scalloped edges like Scribblescratch, this is true, but she hardly owns scalloped edges. Take note of the excerpted post and list of additional entries beneath it, do you see that on any other site (greyscaled or no)? The titles, dates and comments are all a unique(ish) combination. The thing that makes my site the most unique site ever (!!) is the lack of a Wordpress link in the footer. Yes, stop the presses I don’t have a link to Wordpress in my footer. I’m so unique.

What’s my point? That you can’t judge a layout based solely on the base. That’s like comparing Monet’s Nympheas to Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa. They are similar in that they are both paintings, painted on something… with paint. Aside from that they aren’t really all that much alike. There is a reason why so many people use the same base for their layouts: it works. Time and time again it has been proven that the standard two column layout is aesthetically pleasing and that people like it. There is no need to innovate the base, the base has come as far as it can so it matters not what you do to the base itself, it just matters what you layer on top of it.

You know I still can’t get over the fact that people use Wordpress as a deciding factor in whether or not a site is unique. How does something that runs behind the scenes contribute to the originality (or lack thereof) of a site? The only reason that I can come up with is that Kubrick, the default theme for Wordpress, popularized the two-column layout in a way unlike any before, people who didn’t understand the templating system used Kubrick as a base for their layouts, changing the HTML and CSS as they saw fit. Most of us didn’t even bother to remove the sidebar. Callie goes on to say that it doesn’t matter about the power of your blogging system, then I have to wonder why she brought it up in the first place.

This all comes after a post about originality by Sarai: Originality: Asking too much?. If you read Callie’s entire post you’ll see that what she’s trying to get across is that not everyone is original and they don’t have to be. The point she missed was that copying successful topics from other people in a pathetic attempt to gain a few extra comments or stir up some drama isn’t really a good thing. People are less willing to talk about controversial subjects in the fear that they won’t get the response they desire (which is usually that people agree with them). While I can understand and sympathize with them I, too, am getting frustrated with the lack of “originality” (or willingness to go that extra mile, hits and comments be damned).

I’m having trouble understanding what she’s trying to say, probably because she’s, uh, whining about people whining (about people whining about people whining, this is like one of those mirrors in a mirror in a mirror setups). I just have one word (and a whole lot of exclamation points) of advice (“kind” and “helpful”, if you must): PADDING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

#1 Alex Jul 3, 14:01 Permalink

I’ll need to read Callie’s text afterwards (one would think it better to read it first, but whatever). I can be rebellious too.

Anyway, “two columns” is so vague, in the end, that it really doesn’t mean anything. You also can’t deny that it’s pretty handy. It’s like I’m saying that people are unoriginal because they wear a shirt and pants.

#2 Julie Jul 4, 02:09 Permalink

So I quickly scanned over her entry twice, and I still didn’t quite get what she was really trying to say. But I guess you deserve a cookie for a successful challenge against what she said.

I’ve never greyscaled my design to check out the contrast. I’m glad it looks okay-ish. XP Thanks for the plug too.

#3 Rilla Jul 4, 06:14 Permalink

I swear I clicked the submit button last night… But here goes again.

I quickly scanned her post a couple of times and still didn’t quite get what she really wanted to say. Perhaps I could come across 20 sites in one day which would actually look the same after greyscaling, but I think a lot of us also spend a lot of time into innovating and I’m glad the layouts up there all look unique after greyscaling. You should get a cookie for successfully challenging what she proposed.

#4 Rilla Jul 4, 19:00 Permalink

To be honest this is a poorly written article and I got lost reading halfway through the post. What exactly are you trying to say? I get the feeling that this would have been a really interesting post if only the author had a clear point and wrote it succinctly.
I’m along with the others who read this post and are scratching their heads wondering if this was some kind of poor attempt to start drama.

#5 Nel Jul 8, 06:47 Permalink

I’m a bit confused, Nel, what is it that you’re trying to say? That you don’t understand my post or Callie’s? You say you agree with the other commentators who don’t understand the post, but they weren’t referring to me. Could you clarify?

#6 Becky Jul 8, 07:01 Permalink

Hi Becky, I was referring to Callie’s post actually.. I should have made that more clear blush

#7 Nel Jul 8, 17:50 Permalink

Comments are closed on this post (and most other older posts). If you'd still like to discuss this then please feel free to drop me a line using the contact form below.

Contact






|