UChicago's website--usability vs. aesthetics

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
1

<p>Well, I really like the school a lot. No one can deny how beautiful it is as well. However--their website: <a href="http://www.uchicago.edu%5B/URL%5D"&gt;www.uchicago.edu&lt;/a> is so damn ugly (imo). At least when you compare it to some other school's (I like Penn's, Yale's, Brown's, UMich's even Harvard's newer site looks really nice). </p>

<p>When I see Chicago's site, it looks boring, and outdated. Its not colorful, and.... just blehh. When you look at the other websites, they have more color, more headlines, bigger pictures, and the DO NOT have in the exact middle of their homepages a big box asking for money (as U of C's does). They also seem more inviting to have someone want to aimlessly browse, whereas Chicago's really is not.</p>

<p>I was wondering if the site is at least designed well, and if they are planning on making the site less 1995 anytime soon (hehe that might be a bit of an exaggeration). That, or maybe I just have bad taste and U of C's site is just as good looking as other schools' sites.</p>

2

<p>Libby posted a thread a little while ago, if I'm not mistaken, asking for opinions on the website since they were planning on re-designing it. No clue when it's actually going to happen, though.</p>

3

<p>good--than in addition to posting feelings about the current site, why don't people also post their own opinions on how to make the new site better!</p>

<p>I say: color, bigger pics, more headlines/links</p>

4

<p>I think they were actually redesigning the Prospective Student's Advisory Comittee website, which is ugly to the extreme. I find the regualr website quite nice, actually- not cluttered, decently easy to navigate, and pretty classy.</p>

5

<p>I didn't get that at ALL. Harvard's site my look sleek, but it's cluttered with random links and buttons and it's impossible to find ANYTHING! UChicago's is way better IMHO, though I'll admit Yale's is even simpler and more attractive.</p>

6

<p>I enjoy the classy and minimalistic look of Chicago's site. </p>

<p>Not everything will be flashy with bold words and colorful pictures. </p>

<p>When you were little you read children's books- now you can find the value in a book with no pictures or bold words.</p>

7

<p>I know this is a moot thread, but I encourage you to check out MIT's homepage. Their homepage is pretty darn ugly. MIT must be a terrible school-- and nobody who goes there cares about computers or anything like that. :-P</p>

8

<p>Really, amykins? I rather like MIT's website, especially its constantly-changing front page. And the comparative friendliness of its admissions section.</p>

<p>As far as Chicago's is concerned, I think it's clean and not-headache-inducing (some others drive me crazy, like most UK university websites), but a bit slow to load on my fussy Internet connection.</p>

9

<p>I think the site looks nice, because if it had alot of color and sound then it will be like every other college website and that what makes uchicago different-and the uncommon app is wonderful</p>

10

<p>If you are going to have a website, keep it updated or delete that portion of the site that is outdated. It gives the impression that you really can't trust the rest of the site when you see information that is clearly outdated.</p>

<p>For example, go to Home Page, Prospective Students, Welcome Newly Admitted Students. You will see that it takes you to "Class of 2009", but where is 2010?</p>

<p>It's like much of UC, administratively it works better in theory than in practice.</p>

<p>ps R.I.P the Uncommon Application</p>

11

<p>Broken and non-existant links are annoying in all websites!</p>

<p>Class of 2010 is here: <a href="https://classof2010.uchicago.edu/%5B/url%5D"&gt;https://classof2010.uchicago.edu/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

12

<p>I don't think the site is ugly, but sometimes can be hard to navigate. It would be nice if there were easily findable facts about the school aside from motto, etc. about average class size, etc. Still, compared to a lot of school websites (I disagree that UMich's is good; that site is impossible to find anything on), especially international school websites, it's great. I especially love the blogs--there they actually are on the cutting edge.</p>

13

<p>Oh, I hated Michigan's website. I dreaded having to find anything on there. It was almost impossible.</p>

14

<p>It's a good looking site, but it can definitely be hard to navigate.</p>

15

<p>it's much better than brown's, thats for sure.</p>

16

<p>corranged, could you give us more info about what Libby said? I am curious to know when this new site will be launched, or what they are planning to change...</p>

<p>As far as people saying the U of C is being "different" by being imo boring as hell with a dated looking white and maroon site, cmon, why not just put everything in basic html then for that matter?</p>

<p>A U's site should be easy to navigate, but also fun and engaging for anyone who visits it. Part of my point, is that a site should reflect part of the U's personality. I know U of C is very academic, but please, do you really think it wants its image to the world to be that of boring white and maroon colored type, and small low res pics that don't really show what's there?</p>

<p>It can show everyone its intellectualism while being much more engaging (and wouldn't you say that is a more apt image for the U--not boring academics, but engaging intellectualism?)</p>

17

<p>It was a past CC post where people gave opinions on the current site. Libby didn't say anything about what changes may be made or when. You can search for it.</p>

<p>EDIT: Just found the link: <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=238043%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=238043&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

18

<p>Too many clicks are required to do anything on that site.</p>