Know-How Exchange : Website Critique

I'm not crazy about either, in all candor, but I like your version better.

This looks like a spa. I don't think you can have true "hospice" in a spa. I think that's very off-putting to both sides, bordering on disrespectful to those who are in their last days.

I agree with Paul. I don't like either one, though yours is somewhat better. The first one is really hard to read. The colors blend into each other, and nothing really stands out.

It does look like a spa, rather than a place offering care for patients at the end of their lives. Frankly, I wouldn't recommend using "live beautiful" to people who are dying.

Plus, the copy doesn't really tell me how you help ME (or my loved one) to feel as comfortable or as relaxed as possible. It's not speaking directly to the reader.

Jodi

I have to add that it has the spa feel in terms of design and really nothing on the home page gives it away to what she actually does. The content is very ambiguous. For example, it says "personal care in your space"-- what is my space? A place in an office, a center, in my home? I assume my home but why not say something about "the space in which you feel most comfortable - your home." It also says "an excellent selection of eco-.... alternatives." That's way too vague IMO. And as someone else suggested, it's too "me me me."

From what I understand, if it's hospice care using these therapies, then the word hospice needs to be somewhere on the homepage.

I do like the left-side nav on your version. I think the monochromatic color scheme is a little drab and a small bit of accent color could help the look.

Hope the suggestions help!

The old site had easier to find contact information.
The new site is narrower (better).

As others have mentioned, neither of the versions quickly tell me who you're targeting (gender, demographics, location, etc.) and what key/clear benefit you offer them. Don't tell me about your services first, tell me about the problems you solve.

The contrast of the text color and background color is too hard on the eyes as well.

Dear Melissa,

It's obvious you've worked really hard on both designs and your design is indeed the stronger one of the two. But sadly my dear, although both are nice, neither hits the mark.

First of all, neither site auto fils to my browser shape. This is a huge, huge turn off no matter what service one is offering. Scrolling up and down is fine, but not left to right. It's a huge pain in the ass to have to scroll left and right and it's best avoided.

Second, although nice, neither site grabs my attention. The logo styles on both sites lack impact and significance and a bold statement up front makes all the difference in the world when it comes to creating instant rapport. Having to scroll left and right deadens anything you've got on screen, really it does, making both sites nice to look at but far from engaging.

To engage people you MUST put aside your designer hat. Take it off, put it in a closet, and close the God damn door on it. I can say this because I've been earning my living as a graphic designer for almost 25 years and sometimes ... sometimes being a design perfectionist gets in the way of the reason for doing one's job in the first place, which is: to communicate the client's message to the client's prospects about the client's prospects problems.

You simply CANNOT do this when you are in designer mode.
To be effective, the site must convert well. Being pretty does not make sites convert well, being easy to use does. Does this make sense?

Heart, please, listen. I'm TRULY not setting out here to assassinate anyone's character or design skill. But a website that's designed to make money in any way shape or form isn't like a piece of print or a piece of stationery.

A commerce-based website (and yes, this site falls under that banner) must employ persuasion pathways (routes that tell people where to go) and offer sound reasons why they ought to go there NOW. This kind of site also needs powerful architecture that instills belief, confidence, trust, and rapport; and this kind of site MUST EMPLOY really compelling calls to action based on strong positioning statements and reasons why people need to act NOW.

I hope this helps. Good luck to you.

Gary Bloomer
Wilmington, DE, USA

both sites look like blogs. they don't look like "company" websites. the client's uses space better - vs - yours that leaves a lot of unused space around the sides.

As far as the content, I think you would be better off focusing on highlighting the differences in bullet points; giving specific examples. Create Calls to Action. Perhaps add "case studies" which in this case would probably be more appropriately named "Client Stories".

I, too, am not a fan of either site. The client's site is too wordy and the design isn't "grabbing". Yours is a better design, but again, too wordy.

While I understand you want to describe the experience to the visitor, this can be done in more soothing colors, imagery, and photos.

Also, I would experiment in breaking up some of the lines of text so it's easier to read.

Good luck.