Web Publishing

Shelby Mustain

September 17th, 2015

My site: architecturaldigest.com

WEB SITE OVERVIEW

Content analysis:

The purpose of the Architectural Digest Web site is to inspire creative design ideas,

educate visitors on different architectural/interior designs, provide sources for purchasing the

latest design trend, and provide ideas on travel based on the areas design and architecture. To

inspire creative ideas, architectural digest has stories and pictures of designer’s work that gives

readers ideas for their own homes. The web site offers access to DesignFlile, which I would

describe as a Pinterest for room décor only. DesignFlile allows visitors to look at designs for

specific rooms, see descriptions of the rooms, and find out the designer. To educate viewers on

different architectural designs, architechtural digest offers galleries of photos separated by the

type of design. For example they have what is popular in 2014, historic designs, and designs that

are making people talk. To provide sources for purchasing the latest design trend architectural

digest features different shops. They provide background on the shop and also provide pictures

of some of what they offer. Lastly, to provide travel ideas, architectural digest feature different

places around the world that offer immaculate design concepts, but instead of describing the

place as tranquil and relaxing they go into great detail about the building, views, interior, and

furnishings.

After looking at all of the pages offered by archteturaldigest it seems to me that the

purpose of this web site is to inspire and inform designers. The Web site focuses on more

interior design rather than architectural design, in contrast with its name. The web site gives

designers pictures of amazing designs to spark their creativity in hopes that they will find

inspiration for their next design. The web site also informs designers on what is hot right now

and what has people talking. The site also gives Designers the chance to learn about places

around the world, but instead of learning about them like the rest of the world, they are learning

the design aspects of that place. Designers have to keep up with the times and know what a client

might expect. This web site is not a DIY project kind a web site; it is more for serious designers

looking for their next idea.

The content on this web site is very timely. They have design ideas based on celebrities

that are hot in the news right now and have stories on edgy new designs that are changing daily.

As far as engagement goes on this web site, there isn’t much. Visitors can share each design

they find on their social media page, but their isn’t any place for viewers to comment on the

designs. I think keeping comments off the page is a good idea though. This web site is meant

for more serious designers and having it open to anyone would take away from the

professionalism of the site.

There are no videos on the site but like I mentioned before, this isn’t a DIY web site this

is an inspiration and informative web site. I think the DesignFile aspect of the website is a great

took to have. It allows visitors to have their own file of design ideas like having different boards

on Pinterest.

General Company Information:

Architectural Digest, founded in 1920, is a monthly magazine that focuses on interior

design. They are owned by Conde Nast, founded in 1909, and based out of New York City.

Conde Nast has twenty print and digital media brands including Allure, Teen Vogue, The New

Yorker, Golf Digest, and many more. The current editor and chief of the magazine is Margaret

Russell.

According to the “About Us” section of the Conde Nast web site, the company has

reached record profits, tripled their topline grown and expanded its content distribution. It was

also named one of LinkedIn’s Top 25 Most In-Demand Employers. Along with that honor,

Conde Nast has also received many awards on behalf of their magazines like “Hottest Food

Magazine”, “Hottest Gossip Magazine”, “Hottest Travel Magazine”, and many more.

Conde Nast has also recently (2011) developed a new division, Conde Nast

Entertainment. Conde Nast Entertainment develops film, television and premium digital video

programming

Competing Site:

Dwell.com is the competing site I have chosen. Dwell.com is also a design web site that

focuses on interior design while informing and inspiring its visitors. I believe this site is a

competitor to Architectural Digest, because it offers the same information and seems to have the

same audience in mind.

Dwell, like Architectural Digest, offers its viewers the latest trends in home décor. Dwell

has galleries of photos for each room in your house, like Architectural Digest. Dwell also offers

travel information based on the design of the places. Along with articles on places to travel

based on design, Dwell also has articles on renovations done with good design like Architectural

Digest.

One difference between Architectural Digest and Dwell.com are that Dwell.com offers a

store that actually sells popular décor found on the site. I think this is a good element to have

because it really gets visitors involved with the site. If they are buying things from the site I feel

like they might visit more often and you can ask for their email at the point of purchase and send

them newsletters informing them about specials and other things, bringing them back to your

site.

DESIGN & LAYOUT ANALYSIS

Responsive/Mobile

Architecturaldigest.com does not employ a responsive design. A responsive design is

when the site adapts to the size of your window. So if you were to make your window smaller

the web page would still fit within the demotions. The fact that they don’t employ a responsive

design is odd, because their sister site, Bon Appetit does have a responsive design. If they have

one why doesn’t ArchitecturalDesgin.com?

Architecturaldesgin.com also doesn’t have a mobile compatible version. The site that

comes up on and iPhone looks identical to the desktop version except everything is much smaller

and on the smaller screen you have to zoom in just to click a navigation button. Also with the

smaller screen everything is cramped and it’s a lot for your eye to follow on such a small screen.

I would recommend they make mobile site. I did see an ad on their page that advertised a digital

version of their magazine, but only for the iPad, the Nook, and the Kindle.

Layout

Page Elements

The first element to align with the diagram is the header. The header is clear and at the

top of the page identifying what site you are on. The header mostly stays consistent throughout

the website and allows visitors to always go back to the homepage. The places it doesn’t stay

consistent are pages like the photo gallery, the Conde Nast Store, and the video link under the

News tab. The photo gallery is still a part of the site so I think it should have the header. The

same goes for the video link. As for the Conde Nast Store, I can understand why they change

over to the head company header. ArchitecturalDegsin.com is associated with Conde Nast,

because Conde Nast owns them

The header is just black text against a full white background so it doesn’t really stand out

from the rest of the page, but the text is big enough to catch your eye. I think it would make the

site look less cluttered if the header were a different color background.

The second element that aligns with the diagram in our book is the navigation.

Architectualdigest.com has a navigation bar under the header than has six categories that drop

down to several other options to click. These navigation tools appear on every page of the site

above the fold allowing visitors to easily access all the pages. The only problem with the

navigation is that since the website is not responsive some of the navigation gets lost as the page

gets smaller. If someone prefers to have a smaller screen they might miss a drop down menu.

The third element that the web site has that the diagram has is the feature.

Architectualdigest.com has a rolling screen in the middle/top of the page that features six stories

(book says is common to have motion). It scrolls through each one while you are on the page.

The pictures used for the feature are bigger and more vibrant compared to the rest of the pictures

on the page. This lets the site visitor know that those are the most important stories on the page.

The screen shot only shows 2 of the feature stories. I think the design of the feature stories is

good, but unfortunately they get lost below the fold on some screens. This is due to too much

space being wasted at the top of the screen on ads and white space. If they could get rid of one

banner ad or eliminate white space at the top of the page the features would be completely

visible above the fold. It is important that people see the feature stories above the fold because

the feature stories are the best stories and peoples eyes see above the fold first.

Architeturaldigest.com also has a body that matches with the diagram. The definition of a

body is the part where visitors spend most of their time. In this section of the website there are a

lot of stories and links for visitors click on. I don’t think it’s the most effective layout, because

the book says this is the part of the page that focuses on legibility and clarity. This part of the

web site seems very crowded and hard to follow. There are so many pictures and captions

everywhere its hard to keep your eye on one story. If visitors are spending most of their time in

this area things need to be legible. Maybe if the designer cut some of the stories from the

homepage and put them else were it would open up the homepage and it would look cleaner.

In the screenshots below you can also see another element that is in the book, the sidebar.

According to the book the sidebar features information that supports the main content of the

page. The side bar on architechualdigest.com features the most popular articles on the site and

also other articles that are on other websites. There are also many advertisements in the side bar,

which according to the book is very common. ArchitecturalDigest.com makes good use of their

side bar. The information on it is relevant to the main content and it also makes room for ads.

One ad on the side bar looks kind of big to me, but I couldn’t figure out the size so it could be

standard.

The footer is also featured on architecturaldigest.com. According to the book the footer

is like a mini site map. On ArchitecturalDigest.com the footer offers navigation to connect with

AD (architectural digest), ways to contact the magazine, subscribe to the magazine, customer

service, advertising, and etc. There are also many links in the footer, which according to the

book helps sites like Google index their site properly

In the screen shot below you can also see the background of this site, which happens to

be all white. The book says that today the background helps add richness and depth to the page,

but I don’t think an all white background does that. ArchitecturalDigest.com could be going for

a simple look, but I don’t think its working. The white background is harsh on the eyes and

when you scroll its like you’re looking at all the same stuff. If the designer would have used a

background with more depth then I think the page would flow better and be easy on the eyes.

Above the Fold

According to the book, publishers tend to put the most important information about the

fold (for web, before you must scroll down). Architecturaldigest.com has the header, the

navigation, and most of the feature above the fold. I think all of the information above the fold is

very appropriate, but as you can see in the screenshot below, the headlines to the feature story

are cut off. So, from just looking above the fold all you see is some pictures partially cut off

scrolling right to left. I think they need to get rid of the ad underneath the navigation or cut out

some of the white space above. I think the ad under the navigation takes away from the site and

makes the page look cluttered.

After visiting the site later in the day, I realized that the ads under the navigation do not

always appear. I still think that when they do appear it takes away from the site, but to know

they are not always there is a plus. I also realized that what I see on my desktop is not always

what other people are seeing. My desktop cuts off part of the feature, but a desktop I used this

afternoon showed the whole thing. I guess there are just some things that a designer can not

control, but I would still recommend pulling the feature stories up a little to ensure they are not

cut off by the fold. (See above the fold screen shot below Upper Left)

Upper left

When looking to the upper left hand corner of Architecturaldigest.com my eye

immediately goes to the bright blue button that reads, “subscribe”. This button isn’t in the

highest thing in the upper left but it definitely stands out the most. I have a feeling someone

knew what they were doing when they planted this here. Not only is this area the place a viewer

looks to first (according to the book), but they also colored it different so it pops off the page.

Although it is not in the upper most part of the left corner I think it is positioned well because it

is in the upper left and at the beginning of the navigation bar next to a lot of plain black text.

This makes it stand out even more off the white background.

Also in the upper left is a “Welcome to architecturaldigest.com” message, which I don’t

find very important. The message is extremely small and honestly I didn’t even read it the first

few times I visited the site. I think something much more important could go in its place. Maybe

even move the subscribe button up to where the welcome message is.

Ads:

On the homepage of architecturaldigest.com I see a total of five ads. The first being a

L’Oreal Paris banner ad, the second being a Ritz –Carlton club ad, a Lincoln ad, an Infinity ad,

and a promotion ad for DesginFile sponsored by Kolbe Windows and Doors.

The books says that advertisers of course want all their ads above the fold so viewers see

it immediately, but that web designers know better than to do that, because the ads will over

power the message of their site. So they compromise, and I think architecturaldigest.com does a

good job of compromising. They have a banner ad at the top of the page and a banner ad

underneath the navigation bar. I think the banner ad underneath the navigation board is too big,

but if the site is using IAB standards then there probably isn’t much wiggle room.

The third ad is just below the fold and is on the side bar. This ad is the largest of the five

and stands out big time against the white background. I think this ad might be too big and might

be taking away from the stories near it. It takes up as much room as two body stories, that’s

pretty big.

The fourth ad is half way down the page also in the side bar but significantly smaller. The

last ad is at the bottom of the page and is a promotion for DesignFiles. Both of these ads seem to

be good sizes and don’t take away from the site.

The ads on this site are not obnoxious, intrusive, or impede readers from seeing the

content, but they ad to the clutter factor of this site. As you can see in many of these screenshots

this site offers a ton of pictures and with so many pictures the ads and content get mixed as one

and by the end of the page you can’t tell what is what. I think pictures are a great way to grab

your audience’s attention, but loading the site with content pictures and ads is extremely

overwhelming. Personally my eyes don’t know where to start. To reiterate, the ads are not

overpowering, but the amount of content already on the page makes everything blend together.

If this site wasn’t so cluttered the ads would be nicely placed and would not be overwhelming.

(See ad screen shots below)

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS

Traffic Sources: Compete.com and Quantcast.com

Architecturaldigest.com Dwell.com

Average Monthly Uniques:

Compete

321,977 337,756

Average Monthly Uniques:

Quantcast

81,500 573,800

Analysis of architecturaldigest.com

According to compete.com, architecturaldigest.com is brining in 312,977 unique visitors

every month. As you can see in the screen shot below, the number of unique visitors starts rising

at the end of the ear and peaks in the early months of February and March and then descends

back down in the summer months. I could see this being so because the change in the seasons.

The winter is coming to an end and spring is coming. Designers are looking for hot new trend of

the spring to bring to their clients. The information on Quantcast is significantly different. This

website claims that the peak in visitors in in July and March and the site takes its biggest hit in

March. The two web sites do have a peak in February in common, so what we can take from that

is something is bringing people to the site in February.

When I first came across this information I was so confused on how the numbers could

be so different. After some discussion and more research it dawned on me that the only people

who actually have complete access to this information are the people who work for the web site.

These numbers are just estimations, but still relevant. (See screenshots below for traffic data)

Analysis of dwell.com

According to compete.com dwell.com brings in an average of 337,756 unique visitors

each month. This is more than architecturaldigest.com, but still close in number. The peak

months that dwell.com gets most of its visitors is January and March with a big decline in the

middle month February. I could see a peak in January, because now that Christmas is over

designers must take down all the holiday decorations and start fresh with a new year. The peak

in March could have to do with the weather changing and with that new styles are coming.

Quantcast.com has the average monthly unique visitors at 573,800 and the peak months being in

January and February. Dwell.com and ArchitechturlDigest.com have the months January and

March in common meaning that more than one source sees a jump in visitors around those

months.

Something quantcast.com offers for dwell.com and not architecturaldigest.com is the

page views, people, and visits from the past month (mobile and online). As you can see in the

screen shot below the visits reach over 1.7 million and the page views are almost three billion.

(See screenshots below for traffic data)

Traffic Source Media Kit

Architecturaldigest.com

Average Monthly Unique Visitors 1,119,486 (Quarter 1)

Analysis

The numbers on the media kit are significantly different than the numbers found on both

quancast.com and compete.com. The media kit is more accurate considering who ever got the

numbers has access to the analytics for the site. The media kit also gave some information that

the traffic websites didn’t. The media kit tells us that the monthly page views for

architecturaldigest.com is 18,500,000. The interesting thing about the numbers given to us by

the media kit is that they are quarterly not annually. So the average monthly unique visitors are

numbers taken from January, February, and March. Why would they do this? Maybe they want

to show off their best quarter, or maybe they are trying to give advertisers the most accurate

average, we may never know.

The media kit also informs us of demographics that make up their audience. I was not

surprised to find that the household income was over $90,000. ArchitecturalDigest.com is a

sophisticated website for designers who have specific tastes and those tastes tend to be pricy.

This site is also a male dominated site, which actually surprised me. I was just lumping

designers and women in the same category. One other demographic that was interesting was that

56% of viewers have at least a college education. That demographic also hits my point that the

site aimed at more sophisticated/educated people. (See screenshots below)

Traffic Source: Alexa.com

Architecturaldigest.com Dwell.com

Bounce Rate % 47.10% 46.40%

Page Views Per Visitor 6.3 2.23

Daily Time on Site 2:40 2.59

Analysis of architecturaldigest.com

Architecturaldigest.com’s bounce rate is at 47.1%. This means that 47% of the visitors

are leaving after just one page has loaded. Sounds bad, but like we discussed in class the average

bounce rate is 50% and we are coming in below that. I do wonder if the site could get their

bounce rate even lower if they de-cluttered their site a little bit. I found the site a little

overwhelming so maybe if they cleaned it up it would keep visitors there for more than just the

home page.

The page view per visitor is 6.3. This means that when a visitor is on the page, on

average they go to six pages within the site. To be honest I was expecting more. If you

navigated through the site like I did, you would know that there are a million pages to this

website and to only hit six of them would only scratch the surface of this site. The site has a

feature, DesignFile that I would compare to Pinterest. You can navigate by category and see

multiple pictures on a page then click them individually like Interest. I would have though

designers would use multiple page views clicking on several different pictures. I think this says

a lot about visitor engagement. If visitors were truly engaged they would be going to more than

six pages. Again comparing DesginFile to Pinterest, when on Pinterest you click or pin way

more than six pins in a session. If designers are looking at the gallery surely they are looking at

more than six gallery pictures.

The daily time of the site was two minutes and forty seconds. At first this seemed

extremely fast to me. I figured that people would spend much more time looking through all the

different design examples, but then I tested it. I set a timer for two minutes and forty seconds

and just roamed the site. Although I am no designer that amount of time was sufficient. I was

able to look through a lot of design options and even read over some places to travel based on

some designs I liked. This site doesn’t have many long articles to read, it mainly focuses on the

pictures, and this is a design web site after all. The descriptions are short and usually one have a

two line explanation and then the designer, owner, and location. Also after thinking about the

amount of time I started thinking about how impatient and bored people get. Most people

probably can’t stand to stay on one site for more than five minutes.

One other thing I saw on Alexa.com is the sites visited before they visit

architecturaldigest.com. The ones that stood out to me were Facebook and Pinterest. What this

says to me is that people are sharing things from the site to Facebook and Pinterest and other

people are seeing it on Facebook and Pinterest then clicking the link that takes them to the site.

Its funny how that’s just one big circle.

Analysis of dwell.com

Dwell.com’s bounce rate is 46.6%, also coming in lower than the average and in lower

than architecturaldigest.com. I think Dwell.com’s bounce rate is lower because the site is less

cluttered. The site still focuses on pictures, but they are better proportioned and the site just

looks cleaner if that makes sense. I think architecturaldigest.com could take some hints for

dwell.

The page view per visitor for dwell.com is significantly lower than

architectualdigest.com at 2.23, but I believe this is because there is less content on this site. The

site is less deep than ArchitecturalDigest.com. On the other hand they also have a gallery similar

to DesginFile that would lead me to believe that designers would spend a lot of time on. The

gallery is different from ArchitecturalDigest.com in the way that its not all in one place. The

pictures are in categories but are apart of a drop down menu from the navigation. Maybe if they

created a program like DesginFile were everything is in one spot more viewers would stay and

click on more pages.

The daily time on the site is higher than AD by nineteen seconds. That doesn’t sounds

like much, but again I tested it. Set a timer for 19 seconds and navigated through the site. I

found that I was able too look through a good amount of pictures and descriptions in the gallery.

What I take from this is that visitors are finding the content on dwell a little more intriguing.

Whether that be because of the quality of the content or the layout of the web site I’m not sure,

but they are having a little more activity on their site so something must be better.

Just like ArchitecturalDigest.com, people are visiting Pinterest and Facebook

immediately before they go to Dwell.com. (See screen shots on the next page)

Traffic Conclusions

POPULARITY ANALYSIS

Link Popularity Analysis

Architecturaldigest.com Dwell.com

No. of Referring Domains 16,039 13,000

No. of External Backlinks 873,88 875,000

Analysis of Architecturaligest.com

According to Majestic.com Architecturaldigest.com has over 16,000 referring domains.

According to Majestic.com, a referring domain is a domain from which a backlink is pointing to

a page or link. So what that means is that over 16,000 websites or different URL’s are referring

to architecturaldigest.com. I can only see the top five sites that are referring our site, and three of

those sites are sister sites. Although this doesn’t make it a bad referring domain, its not a great

one. The way I look at it is that its like a pity link. The site is your sister so you have to link it,

but the two sites don’t necessarily have anything in common with each other to relate their

viewers. Those are just five of the referring domains so I’m sure some of the other 16,000 are

sites that relate to design and home décor.

Majestic.com also tells us that architecturaldigest.com has 873,882 external backlinks.

What this means is that there are 873,882 links to architecturaldigest.com or a page on

architecturaldigest.com. This is a large number, but I understand why. Just because the site

itself might not be relevant to another site, a story, picture, idea on the site might be relevant.

For example, on Dwell.com there is a story on solar panels and their cost efficacy. You don’t

have to be a designer to be interested in that story. There are plenty of people out there

concerned with the environment that would appreciate that story, so they backlink it. As for the

top sites that backlink Architecturaldigest.com, two out of five of them are sister sites. Like I

stated before, this doesn’t make it a bad link, but it’s not as credible as a site that actually relates

to the industry would be.

Analysis of Dwell.com

Unfortunately Majestic.com was being far from its name and giving me trouble, so for

Dwell.com I used Ahrefs.com to find their popularity. As for their referring domains, they were

below Architecturedigest.com at 13,000. So this means that 13,000 different URL’s link to

Dwell.com. The top five sites that did backlink to Dwell.com were more credible than the top

five of Architecturaldigest.com. The top five links were all to sites not owned by Dwell’s

publisher (Dwell LLC), and were sites that dealt with design, architecture, and furniture. I say

these are more credible, because they relate with the industry Dwell.com is in. The sites might

not be as big as the sister sites architecturaldigest.com has referring their site, but they are much

more relevant than the sister sites.

Also found on Ahrefs.com is the external backlinks. The external backlinks for

Dwell.com was 875,000. Out of the top five sites that were backlinking Dwell, one of them

looked to be quality. The site is thedesignjunction.co.uk, a contemporary design website that is

promoting a contemporary design show. Although this is a lot different than Dwell.com, people

who are interested in going to a design show would definitely be interested in browsing through

the design ideas that Dwell offers. It would be like a design show on their desktop. (See

Dwell.com screenshots below)

Social Media Analysis

Page-based social sharing efforts

Architectualdigest.com Dwell.com

Facebook Share tools Most pages Most pages

Twitter Share tools Most pages Most pages

Google Plus share tools Most pages Most pages

Other share tools Pinterest Pinterest

` Analysis

Both sites used sharing tools on all of their pages that had some kind of design idea/story

on it. On both sites there were no sharing tools on the homepage, but there were links to their

Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, and Google Plus. I think having your social media sites linked to

your homepage makes it easy for visitors to follow you. Having following tools rather than

sharing tools on your homepage makes sense, because although a person could share your entire

site on social media they are more likely to share a story they like. As for sharing tools, these

were on every page (both sites) that included a design story, picture, and on the galleries of

pictures. This makes it extremely easy for visitors to share a picture, design idea, or story that

they like. Since both of these sites are made up of design ideas, pictures, and design stories this

means that just about every page other than the home page has a sharing tool.

When using the sharing tools, both sites took you to another window to share. For

example if you wanted to share a story on Facebook, you clicked on the share bottom and it

opened a new window that brought up the article ready to be shared to your profile. I know in

class we saw sites that just opened up a new window that was the sites homepage, so opening up

a window that is ready to be shared to your profile is much more effective and easy for sharing.

Dwell had a cool feature where all you had to do was roll over the social media icon and

a window appeared so you didn’t even have to leave the site to follow their page.

Architecturaldigest.com on the other hand opened a new window when you clicked the icon.

This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but who wouldn’t like the convenience of not even leaving the

page to give the site a follow. (See social media screenshots on next page)

Popularity Conclusions

Compared to Dwell.com, Architecturaldigest.com isn’t that much more popular.

Although the numbers of referring domains is bigger, the quality of those referring sites isn’t as

good as Dwell.com. So really the fact that is number is bigger doesn’t really matter if the sites

are not quality and related to the industry. I think Architechutaldigest.com is more known that

Dwell.com, but that is not popularity. Architecturaldigest.com is owned by a big named

company that owns several other big magazines so I think that’s why it gets bigger numbers that

Dwell.com. When it comes to social media sharing, both sites encourage sharing the same

amount so I wont say that one is better than the other, but over all I would come to the

conclusion that Dwell.com has more quality popularity and Architecturaldigest.com has more

quantity.

SUCCESS CONCLUSIONS

To compare the success of a website you have to break success down into multiple

categories. The first category I will talk about is quality content. Both sites had similar content

that was consistently relevant to the purpose of the site, to inspire creative design ideas, educate

visitors on different architectural/interior designs, provide sources for purchasing the latest

design trend, and provide ideas on travel based on the areas design and architecture. The second

thing to look at is the number of visitors. In this category ArchitechturalDigest.com won,

bringing in an average of over million unique visitors in one quarter. The speed of a site should

also be taken into consideration. In this contest Dwell.com wins. ArchitecturalDigest.com’s

website is so cluttered with millions of pictures that it takes longer to load. Dwell.com has

pictures as well, but not as many so their site not only looks cleaner, but their page loads faster.

The next thing to evaluate is usefulness. Does the site offer us something? Both sites offer great

deals of information, stories, pictures, and design ideas to take into our lives or to share on social

media. The last thing I look at is popularity. Not if one site is better known than the other, but

the number of quality sites that link to their site. From the top five referring domain sites that I

got to see, I think Dwell.com is more popular. The numbers for Dwell.com are smaller but the

quality of the sites is much better. I only saw the top five sites that linked to each site, but from

those five Dwell.com comes out on top. So in conclusion these sites compete very well it would

be a close call to say which one was better. In my personal opinion from the data I have seen, I

think Dwell.com is a better site. Some numbers may disagree, but you have to look deeper than

the numbers. You have to actually use the sites and understand the meaning behind the numbers

before you make a decision, and from doing all of that I will say that ArchitecturalDigest.com is

a successful site, but Dwell.com is more suc cessful.