10.06.2008

Site Critique: Twitter


http://www.twitter.com

I see Twitter as another embodiment of “Web 2.0” with social networking is taken to an extreme of constant access. Users upload 140-character messages via internet and cell phone, describing what they are doing or thinking at that very moment. This gives the internet public the ability to read and voice anything instantly, from the most profound to the most mundane, as long as it’s short enough.

The Twitter site has three menus – top, right, and bottom. The top deals with the site’s social networking functionality. From this one bar, users can edit their profile or search for each other (by name, location, or if they are on another networking site). This bar does not change anywhere on the site, meaning a user can always easily return to his or her home page. Next, a messaging sidebar lets users quickly access replies and recent entries from their list of friends. This sidebar may change or disappear depending on what is selected in the top menu. This presents users with information more relevant to the section of the site they are on. The links at the bottom lead off-site to company information like mobile downloads and site maintenance updates. This menu also does not change, but it often gets hidden beneath the fold. This is acceptable because most Twitter users do not need constant access to the information it provides.

Second-level navigation is represented by tabs. When the sidebar is in message-viewing mode, the type of message you are viewing is highlighted in white. Because the background of the content pane is white, this is similar to a “current tab.” Often, the tab system is used within the content pane itself like when a user is editing different aspects of his or her profile. Because the tab labels are explanatory, this is a convenient way to save on screen real estate and categorize information.

The grid layout of the page – where the content, company logo, and menus are - stays the same. The most prominent feature is always at the top of the content page, in the screen center. When a user is logged in, it is a comment box which asks “What are you doing?”. This box beckons to be filled in. However, it took me awhile to figure out that the number to its upper right was counting the number of characters in my message. Considering the importance length holds with Tweets, this should be clearer. On anyone else’s page, what stands out is their name and icon. If you are not already following them, the “follow” button appears under their image. This, combined with the comment box, serve as calls to action, depending on where the user is on the site. It also helps with social networking by focusing on the identity of the poster.


I dislike the default Twitter colors – cyan, light green, and burnt sienna. They are meant to be modern and recall birds, but I feel they reek of “we are so obviously Web 2.0.” Luckily, because Twitter is about social networking, the creators allowed users to customize their pages. Background colors can be changed, and the default “o_O” avatar can be replaced by a user image. However, for its customization, all content panes remain white for readability and consistent navigation. Also, users are not allowed to specify which fonts are used.
Concerning fonts, the site does not have much variation in terms of typography. The main font is the one user in the “Tweets,” a large sans-serif. Links are bolded. Post times, however, are displayed in a lighter, smaller, serif, font to prevent them from interfering with post content. They also add white space between entries which helps break the vibration when reading.

Overall, the site has a clear structure which maintains simplicity and brings user identity to the forefront. With Twitter, internet communication has been reduced to an incredibly simple form, and its users are always connected - online and off.

No comments: