On 2005-10-14 jacek@gdansk.int.pl wrote:

> Or maybe there are better projects. Wouldn't it be a good idea to make a
> conquest to design a site that would look in more proffesional look than
> current and fit better with the NetBSD logo colors?
> Current site design isn't in my opinion something that makes you want to
> try netbsd.

  IMO, NetBSD's basic web design is one of the best, particularly the home
page.  Some of the organization and content beyond that could use work
(particularly the features and documentation page, IMO).  I think the site
generally has a good mix of explanatory text and links, and mostly manages
to avoid the "many types of documentation are avalable"  type statements.

  I particularly do not like "boxing" or otherwise artificially
restricting the viewable area (particularly when that forces you to
scroll).  I like that NetBSD does not try to specify precicely how I will
view the site or tell me what I will do while viewing it.  IMO, it is a
bad idea to try to turn an image into a website.

  WRT "downloads" and such, I think that is the kind of fine tuning that
is (almost) always helpful and has generally been done well so far.  IMO,
the best way to add a "downloads" link would be another sentance in the
main text, like: "Both source and binary distributions are avalable by FTP
download at many mirror sites or by third party CD-ROM)." (linking
download, mirror sites, and CD-ROM).  I like the current Distribution
section and would not change that.  IMO, emphasising how to get it is a
particularly good idea since one place you can't get it is the NetBSD
store :) (that link should probably be "promotional store" or such).

  My largest complaint is that there is no mention on the front or
documentation pages of the prominance of the mailing lists, and the
documentation section prominantly lists FAQs without explaining that their
function is significantly different than the usual site FAQ (calling them
"technical FAQs" might help discourage non-users from trying to look at
them).  This is different from common practice in many other free software
projects where wikis and howtos can be a major focus of user support.
Some explanatory text on the documentation pages about the relative
importance of various resources would be helpful.

  I would also add another sentance to the main front text like:  "NetBSD
is user-supported through archived mailing lists and the NetBSD Guide."
(linking archived, mailing lists, and NetBSD Guide).  I would then remove
the sentance starting "It's clean design" and link "portable" in the first
sentance to the features page and after that word add "and interoperable"
with a link to the interoperability page.  The "features"  and
"interoperability" pages should be combined or cross linked.  Saying "no
hype" on the features page insults the reader's intelligence, particularly
in the current context.

Matthew Orgass
darkstar@city-net.com