Coffeehouse Thread

14 posts

The Microsoft.com home page

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    I'm not sure what's going on around here. The thing is amazing coherent. What gives?

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    c_str

    I don't know , the fourth banner image is about .net. Shouldn't it be about JavaScript and writing applications that require to stretch across your desk, while dancing like a monkey?    Tongue Out

     

     

     

     

  • User profile image
    PopeDai

    Huzzah!

    I think a low-point for Microsoft.com was the website during Windows Vista's launch in late 2006 - there were things that were clickable or collapseable without any good reason, and it was also oh-so-ugly. But this? It's a homepage I'm proud of.

  • User profile image
    felix9

    OK, now Microsoft.com looks more like MSDN. DevDiv for the win ? Devil

  • User profile image
    MasterPi

    Did they change it again? It looks the same as it did a few months ago for me.

    Have you guys tried resizing the window? It's a "responsive" page. 

     

    The Visual Studio site looks amazing as well.

     

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    @MasterPie: When I think responsive, I think having three breakpoints, one for a phone, one for a tablet in portait, another for a modern computer screen / landscape tablet.

    The main breaks have min-widths of 280px, 540px, 680px, 900px, and 1140px.

    There are a secondary set of breaks that use ems instead of pixels. The second set seems to reside within the first set. I suppose two teams were working on different parts.

    The secondary set uses min-widths of 33.75em (540px), 42.5em (680px), 64.0625em (1025px), 70em (1120px).

    Searching for the second set brought me here. I guess those break points are fairly unique.

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    Duncanma

    @JoshRoss: that site suggests the Build site was first, which isn't quite true. Microsoft.com was first, but shipped only as a preview for a few months. Not a big deal, but just something I noticed.

  • User profile image
    cbae

    Microsoft.com looks so much more consumer-focused than before.

    FYI: I noticed some inconsistencies amongst microsoft.com and the major product sites. These inconsistencies have to do with the links to the other product sites found in the footers of these sites.

    1. Microsoft main site, Office, Windows, Surface, and Microsoft Store have links to the other product sites, but Windows Phone, Xbox, Skype, and Bing do not. Although in the case of Bing, it probably doesn't make sense to have these links.

    2. Windows Phone and Windows are the only sites with a back link to the main Microsoft site--the Microsoft logo on the lower right corner links back to microsoft.com.

    3. The Windows site is missing a link to the Microsoft Store.

    4. The typography used in the links on the Windows site is larger and bolder than on the other sites, and subsequently looks nicer than on the other product sites.

    5. The Microsoft logo and copyright are inconsistent across all sites:

    • Windows Phone - copyright and logo are side to side
    • Xbox - copyright and logo are stacked and left-justified (others are right-justified)
    • Skype - copyright is missing
    • Microsoft Store - copyright and logo are stacked and have a have small gap between
    • Office - copyright and logo are stacked and have a large gap between
    • Surface - copyright and logo are stacked, have a large gap between, and use the alternate Microsoft logo (the one with the colored windows). The copyright also uses a particularly small font size compared to the other sites. (Note: this variant looks the worst out of all the sites.)
    • Windows - copyright and logo are stacked and the copyright is bolded (Note: this variant looks the nicest out of all the sites.)
    • Microsoft.com - copyright and logo are stacked and have a large gap between
    • Bing - There is only a copyright. No Microsoft logo.

    6. The section header for the links are inconsistent. On the Microsoft Store, Surface, and Microsoft.com sites, the section header reads "Other Microsoft sites". On the Office site, it reads "Other Microsoft Sites" (note the capitalization). On the Windows site, it reads "Visit our friends".

    7. The links on the Microsoft Store open in a new page (i.e. target="_blank"), but the links on the other sites do not.

    With 94K+ employees, I'm sure you guys can find somebody anal enough to scour the sites for issues like this. If not, I have experience with CMSes and can work for the low, low price of Surface Pros and Windows Phones. Wink

  • User profile image
    contextfree`

    I like the responsive design on mscom, but it seems to be about the only Microsoft site that has adopted that so far.

    BTW different people seem to have different ideas of what "responsive web design" means, so to clarify - to me it means "usable in snap view" Big Smile

  • User profile image
    kettch

    @contextfree`: I have a couple sites I frequently need in snap view, but they don't respond very well. I ended up making a custom css file that coerces them into working. That would be a cool feature to have built into Modern IE. If a site's content is detected as not adapting to snap view, then have a button similar to the compatibility button that applies tricks to reflow the content.

  • User profile image
    Bas

    @kettch: Good idea. However, I'd say lose the button and just enable it automatically as soon as the browser goes into snap view.

  • User profile image
    kettch

    @Bas: I figured I'd leave the escape route incase the site is doing something weird and goes all weird if you try to apply a common template. Maybe the first time it does it automatically for a given site, it can pop a dialog that asks "Does this site look ok snapped?".

  • User profile image
    figuerres

    , cbae wrote

    Microsoft.com looks so much more consumer-focused than before.

    FYI: I noticed some inconsistencies amongst microsoft.com and the major product sites. These inconsistencies have to do with the links to the other product sites found in the footers of these sites.

    1. Microsoft main site, Office, Windows, Surface, and Microsoft Store have links to the other product sites, but Windows Phone, Xbox, Skype, and Bing do not. Although in the case of Bing, it probably doesn't make sense to have these links.

    2. Windows Phone and Windows are the only sites with a back link to the main Microsoft site--the Microsoft logo on the lower right corner links back to microsoft.com.

    3. The Windows site is missing a link to the Microsoft Store.

    4. The typography used in the links on the Windows site is larger and bolder than on the other sites, and subsequently looks nicer than on the other product sites.

    5. The Microsoft logo and copyright are inconsistent across all sites:

    • Windows Phone - copyright and logo are side to side
    • Xbox - copyright and logo are stacked and left-justified (others are right-justified)
    • Skype - copyright is missing
    • Microsoft Store - copyright and logo are stacked and have a have small gap between
    • Office - copyright and logo are stacked and have a large gap between
    • Surface - copyright and logo are stacked, have a large gap between, and use the alternate Microsoft logo (the one with the colored windows). The copyright also uses a particularly small font size compared to the other sites. (Note: this variant looks the worst out of all the sites.)
    • Windows - copyright and logo are stacked and the copyright is bolded (Note: this variant looks the nicest out of all the sites.)
    • Microsoft.com - copyright and logo are stacked and have a large gap between
    • Bing - There is only a copyright. No Microsoft logo.

    6. The section header for the links are inconsistent. On the Microsoft Store, Surface, and Microsoft.com sites, the section header reads "Other Microsoft sites". On the Office site, it reads "Other Microsoft Sites" (note the capitalization). On the Windows site, it reads "Visit our friends".

    7. The links on the Microsoft Store open in a new page (i.e. target="_blank"), but the links on the other sites do not.

    With 94K+ employees, I'm sure you guys can find somebody anal enough to scour the sites for issues like this. If not, I have experience with CMSes and can work for the low, low price of Surface Pros and Windows Phones. Wink

    as I recall different teams at Microsoft sometimes own the websites for that product / or group.

    seems like if that is still true that MS needs to have one team of web designers / editors who just check each web site and make sure it conforms to some standards.   a Web QA team.

  • User profile image
    kettch

    @figuerres: They've got lots of tools for scanning sites for standards compliance. It seems like they could have an internal crawler. I read a blog post from somebody who worked on a particular site, and he mentioned that their web farm has thousands of separate web applications that get exposed to the outside world. I'm sure it's a very daunting task to standardize those. Although, you could probably pick 10-20 that got the most customer hits and focus on those.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.