I’ve been thinking lately about the whole Web 2.0 movement. I like the idea of integrating more dynamic means of interacting with sites but the one thing I don’t care for is the cookie-cutter sites of late that are associated with Web 2.0 design style. I’ll be the first to admit I’ve got some of those elements working within my site but there are no rounded corners to be found and I’m sans gradients except in my logo.

Not to say that the sites I’m referring to aren’t well designed, because they are but they are starting to all run together. I also know that the Web 2.0 movement isn’t necessarily about design but more on interactivity.

Back on point, I’ve always thought of my website in two ways, first it’s the best portfolio I can provide. Not all sites that you develop for people look the way you’d like them to so your personal portfolio page may not represent the best work you can do. You have to do what the client wants and work within that framework and honestly, those limitations. However, your own personal website can be anything you want it to, so why make it look like someone else’s? Better yet, why make it look like everyone else’s?

Which brings up the second way I look at my site—it’s my personal site and it gives me the freedom to experiment with things. If I want the site to be sparse and not over-designed, I can do that. If I want it to be flashy with all kinds of bells and whistles, I can do that too. It’s pretty much a vessel for personal expression.

I don’t want to come across as if I’m slamming the sites I’m talking about because I like most of them a great deal but it does make you wonder if it pays to stand out from the crowd or to blend in.

Comments are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.