Drawing an Iceberg -Concept designer or HTML designer

Recently I read an article in Revolution that looked at the pros and cons of specialist independent web design agency over technical web development company over an integrated communications agency. While I intend to blog about this issue in detail later, this article and some work I've done recently for 2 integrated communication agencies has highlighted a point of great industry debate: Who designs better websites - the concept designer from print / graphics / advertising / brand ID background(working with no HTML programming skill) or the technician who programmes HTML / CSS / Flash etc who lives and breathes websites? In advising on the "buildability" of a given website route to a concept designer I found myself explaining that only 40% of great web design is based on what it looks like - 60% of the iceberg is below water. Meaning, in a time of full digital marketing employment, the designer truly worth their salt is focused on intuative transitions from page to page, navigation that has a clearly communicated hierarchy across content boxes, secondary nav and the main nav. ebay, amazon and Google are not sexy designs but their brands have grown through excellence in usable, intuative technology.
I struggle to decide whether one type of designer is better than the other. Arguably the HTML designer will achieve a presentable route faster but is less likely to challenge the client's expectations of creativity. Ideally have both - make sure they work with mutual respect for each other and distribute briefs based on suitability for that client.

iGoogle launch is poor brand management

Google have rebranded their search engine for all Safari web browsers. Safari is the web browser supplied free on all Apple Mac's running the OSX series of operating systems. While most Mac users use Firefox browsers, Safari has seen growth in the last few years. However, perhaps as Google's Eric Schmidt is also on the board of Apple, Google has attempted to cash in on the techno-cool associated with i-pod's dominance of the MP3 player market and brand perceptions of Apple at the Prince of Techno-cool. In my view, this attempt at brand personalisation for Mac users reeks of the same strategy that Microsoft used when Microsoft launched a customisable, graphically rich version of Internet Explorer 5 for the mac. Internet Explorer usage on the Mac continued to fall to a point when Microsoft killed off their Internet Explorer Mac browser. Google, the e-business global super brand should take heed and think carefully before attempting 'cool - britainnia' style PR strategies.