VS vs HC

The Valley of the Shadow is not new for us, we had done research and had a discussion of it. Which it impresses us most is professional, it just like a huge archive in which you can find many kinds of so much information. Those traditional historians are so pleased to see the emergence of this type of site. It divides the period in three part according to the process of one event and it provides huge amount of census and first-hand materials such as letters, newspapers, diaries, maps, official records, soldier’s records and so on. They will feel they enter into a heaven if they could use those powerful search engine in this site or they can just be like sitting in an archive and find something which they are interested in if they couldn’t. The site makes me recall the cars made by Germany: stability, technology, equality etc., they contain all the important events one car should have but one deadly weakness is that most of them are so dull. That is also the question for The Valley of the Shadow. The lifeless homepage and index page are so unwelcomed to the users. If the designers wanted to commemorate those people, they could use a better way but not to use a shape which combines the cross and the blueprint of a church which lead to a result of turtle shell for the index page. What’s more, the site is so well built that it doesn’t provide a space for the contributors. In a word, based on the criterion of traditional form of history and the new digital history, it’s not a perfect website but it integrate two ways of history so well. We can regard it as a pretty good initial form in the period of digital history.

Let’s look at The History Channel. It has more fashion than its “elder brother”. It has a homepage more acceptable by the users nowadays. And it has many resources which VS doesn’t have: videos and even TV shows. Actually, the video resource is more acceptable to users than those boring paper-made resources. Another one advantage is its link. When we search for something, it’s easy to find some links with which have relations and this way can expand the interest of the users to explore further in a easy method. But I have a question. If I can search all the information by internet with other sites such as Google and Wikipedia, why do I have to use this amateurish and flowery site. Maybe you think it’s good for those beginners, that’s what I confess, but for those historians, they prefer a solid Germany-made car than a car which only have a flashing crust but nothing good in engine and chassis. The things which can be done by The History Channel also can be done by other sites and lack of concentration and profession are its big problems which I think they are the common problems for many historical websites.