Slashdot Mirror


Top Ten Web-Design Mistakes of 2002

yoey writes "Another famous Nielsen year-end wrapup: "Every year brings new mistakes. In 2002, several of the worst mistakes in Web design related to poor email integration. The number one mistake, however, was lack of pricing information, followed by overly literal search engines.""

32 of 542 comments (clear)

  1. You know what I like? by ZoneGray · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know what's a nice usability feature? A server that can handle the load. You click on the link, the page loads. Nielsen should get one of them.

  2. And the #1 mistake of all times is ... by oblom · · Score: 5, Funny

    Forgetting to prepare server for /. effect

  3. They missed one... by misfit13b · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Too Much Flash Animation

    It seems to me that some web designers use it almost like a crutch. As if some needless animation that I have to wait through is going to enhance my enjoyment of a website. If anything, it just makes me want to visit elsewhere.

    1. Re:They missed one... by rnturn · · Score: 4, Insightful
      ``For some reason, many websites seem to be optimized for 805-pixel-wide...''

      Wouldn't it be nice if web designers stopped dictating the size you need to run your browser? One designer tells me I'm supposed to run my browser at 800x600, another at 1024x768, and another at some oddball resolution. (Which tells me one thing: they're using the browser at full screen and I'd bet that it's on a Windows box as well.) A pox on all who don't use the ``width=NN%'' option on tables.

      --
      CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
    2. Re:They missed one... by greenhide · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'd also like to point out that some webdesigners actually develop websites as a job for real living customers. Who pay them. For making websites look like what they want. Pretty websites. And sometimes those pretty websites require absolutely (does that work as an adverb?) sized tables.

      The fact is, browsers are *still* not all behaving the same way, and the only safe way to have a site appear correctly is to use absolute pixels. Stylesheets are nice for simple text styling, but can't even be depended on for font sizes! (Don't believe me? Set up a web page with a style

      BODY { font-size: medium }

      And see how it shows up on IE, IE for Mac, Netscape, and Netscape for Mac. They'll all be different sizes, last time I checked.)

      Since clients want pretty layouts, which includes, necessarily, the use of tables, from time to time absolute pixel widths have to be used.

      Our technique for getting around the 100% of 800 = 805 problem is to set the table to 95% instead of 100%, and then center it on the screen. It also adds to the whitespace on the left and right, so it's actually a pretty good thing.

      --
      Karma: Chevy Kavalierma.
  4. Web-Design Mistakes? That's easy... by Draigon · · Score: 4, Funny

    One word: Flash.
    Two words: Flash Intro

    Yeah sure, it can be done right, but the other 99.9% of the time I hate the world.

    --
    -Rabbit
  5. Lack of pricing information (XBox Live site) by davie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Our kids are excited about XBox and want to play online, but after visiting the XBox Live site I'm not sure it's going to happen. I spent about 30 minutes poking around on the site and found no information on pricing. This annoys me. I'm not going to buy something to find out how much it will cost.

    --
    slashdot broke my sig
  6. other mistakes by dkone · · Score: 5, Insightful

    lack of real world contact info. sometimes a phone call is required.

    Doug

    1. Re:other mistakes by AndroidCat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Peeve: Companies that post jobs on their site, but don't provide a street address so you can figure out if it's possible to actually get there if you ever get an interview. I guess they want you to look up their domain registration in whois to prove your L337 skills.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  7. Web Standards? by JBMcB · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about sites that code for IE only, and won't display anything, or broken tables, or text layered on top of other text..

    It's also annoying when using a high res, small screen, as on a laptop, you crank up the font size in Mozilla or IE and the fixed size tables sites use to do layout make it impossible to read anything. ARGH!

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
    1. Re:Web Standards? by principio · · Score: 4, Funny

      I could not agree more. Although I have always found it more amusing when companies that sell products for the Macintosh have web sites that cannot be viewed from a Mac. Like it would have been that hard to test.

  8. Re:for those who dont wanna wait on the page to lo by Spoons · · Score: 5, Funny

    For the love of god man! Learn to use the
    tag...

  9. Re:They missed websites that are just unnavigable by archeopterix · · Score: 5, Funny

    You have no spirit of adventure. Suppose that I hit a toaster manufacturer page looking for some technical data on a toaster. It is a very thrilling experience to click the "products" link and have to choose between "wooden products", "red&yellowish products", "other products", "products other than all of the above" and "guess where this link will take you". The products->toasters->specific model path is just boring when compared to that.

  10. /. almost fails the Number 9 by burgburgburg · · Score: 5, Funny

    The URL for this article has 70 characters, which is less then the 75 mentioned in mistake number 9. Of course, the post comment page is 109 characters, so I won't be giving it out to anyone over the phone very soon.

    1. Re:/. almost fails the Number 9 by Reziac · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you need to voice-quote some obnoxiously long URL, check out tinyurl.com -- it converts long URLs into short temporary URLs.

      Frex, your post's http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=48804&cid=4944 480 becomes http://tinyurl.com/3s1j

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  11. Javascript in links and Flash animation by phylus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think we should be much more worried about the trend in using flash for everything. I've seen sites that have whole link bars, with no special effects that warrant it, done in flash. Isn't that' what an href is for?

    I do a lot of web developing and I've come realize that a lot of things that I want to do cannot be done without having Javascript in the link. While it is sometimes annoying when I'm browsing a site and cannot directly link to a page because they use a POSTed form inside of a Javascript, there are many many positive uses for Javascript, such as history.go(-1).

    1. Re:Javascript in links and Flash animation by TheLink · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In my experience javascript has rarely been used positively.

      It seems MUCH of javascript encourages CRAP web design. People are encouraged to do stupid things and then try to use javascript as a bandaid.

      So many sites have javascript practically rewriting entire HTML pages.

      Even history.go(-1) seems silly to me. Users aren't stupid - the back button is one of the first things they learn or are taught about when web browsing. Given all the various web technologies, can you give me a good reason why you would need history.go(-1), or any of the history stuff for that matter?

      The other thing - you often can have javascript in the link, but still keep a usable href. I don't understand why so _many_ sites require javascript where a simple link will do. I hate this the most. Who cares about not having prices when the links don't even work? Or you can't even see anything on the first page.

      Fortunately most sites that require Javascript (or Flash) for access are usually useless - filled with fluff or even lies.

      Another thing, many sites that use javascript everywhere including forms appear to have been built by clueless idiots. There are often obvious web security problems with their sites. Easy SQL injection etc.

      There are indeed good uses for Javascript, but sadly, excrement has been put to more good uses than Javascript.

      --
  12. Last but not least... by gUmbi · · Score: 5, Insightful

    11. Lack of line breaks

    Jason.

  13. Fornatted by damiam · · Score: 4, Informative
    Top Ten Web-Design Mistakes of 2002

    Summary: Every year brings new mistakes. In 2002, several of the worst mistakes in Web design related to poor email integration. The number one mistake, however, was lack of pricing information, followed by overly literal search engines. As the Web grows, websites continue to come up with ways to annoy users. Following are ten design mistakes that were particularly good at punishing users and costing site owners business in 2002.

    • No Prices No B2C ecommerce site would make this mistake, but it's rife in B2B, where most "enterprise solutions" are presented so that you can't tell whether they are suited for 100 people or 100,000 people. Price is the most specific piece of info customers use to understand the nature of an offering, and not providing it makes people feel lost and reduces their understanding of a product line. We have miles of videotape of users asking "Where's the price?" while tearing their hair out. Even B2C sites often make the associated mistake of forgetting prices in product lists, such as category pages or search results. Knowing the price is key in both situations; it lets users differentiate among products and click through to the most relevant ones.

    • Inflexible Search Engines Overly literal search engines reduce usability in that they're unable to handle typos, plurals, hyphens, and other variants of the query terms. Such search engines are particularly difficult for elderly users, but they hurt everybody. A related problem is when search engines prioritize results purely on the basis of how many query terms they contain, rather than on each document's importance. Much better if your search engine calls out "best bets" at the top of the list -- especially for important queries, such as the names of your products.

    • Horizontal Scrolling Users hate scrolling left to right. Vertical scrolling seems to be okay, maybe because it's much more common. Web pages that require horizontal scrolling in standard-sized windows, such as 800x600 pixels, are particularly annoying. For some reason, many websites seem to be optimized for 805-pixel-wide browser windows, even though this resolution is pretty rare and the extra five pixels offer little relative to the annoyance of horizontal scrolling (and the space consumed by the horizontal scrollbar).

    • Fixed Font Size Style sheets unfortunately give websites the power to disable a Web browser's "change font size" button and specify a fixed font size. About 95% of the time, this fixed size is tiny, reducing readability significantly for most people over the age of 40. Respect the user's preferences and let them resize text as needed. Also, specify font sizes in relative terms -- not as an absolute number of pixels.

    • Blocks of Text A wall of text is deadly for an interactive experience. Intimidating. Boring. Painful to read. Write for online, not print. To draw users into the text and support scannability, use well-documented tricks: subheads bulleted lists highlighted keywords short paragraphs the inverted pyramid a simple writing style, and de-fluffed language devoid of marketese.

    • JavaScript in Links Links are the Web's basic building blocks, and users' ability to understand them and to use various browser features correctly is key to enhancing their online skills. Links that don't behave as expected undermine users' understanding of their own system. A link should be a simple hypertext reference that replaces the current page with new content. Users hate unwarranted pop-up windows. When they want the destination to appear in a new page, they can use their browser's "open in new window" command -- assuming, of course, that the link is not a piece of code that interferes with the browser's standard behavior. Users deserve to control their own destiny. Computers that behave consistently empower people by letting them use their own tools and wield them accurately.

    • Infrequently Asked Questions in FAQ Too many websites have FAQs that list questions the company wished users would ask. No good. FAQs have a simplistic information design that does not scale well. They must be reserved for frequently asked questions, since that's the only thing that makes a FAQ a useful website feature. Infrequently asked questions undermine users' trust in the website and damage their understanding of its navigation.

    • Collecting Email Addresses Without a Privacy Policy Users are getting very protective of their inboxes. Every time a website asks for an email address, users react negatively in user testing. Don't assume that people will sign up for a newsletter just because it's free. You have to tell them, right there, what they will get and how frequently it will hit their mailboxes. Also, you must provide an explicit privacy statement or an opt-in checkbox right next to the entry field. Otherwise, you have little hope of collecting email addresses other than mickey@mouse.com.

    • URL > 75 Characters Long URLs break the Web's social navigation because they make it virtually impossible to email a friend a recommendation to visit a Web page. If the URL is too long to show in the browser's address field, many users won't know how to select it. If the URL breaks across multiple lines in the email, most recipients won't know how to glue the pieces back together. The result? No viral marketing, just because your URLs are too long. Bad way to lose business.

    • Mailto Links in Unexpected Locations When you click a link on the Web, what do you expect? To get a new page that contains information about the anchor you just clicked. What don't you expect? To spawn an email program that demands that you write stuff rather than read it. Mailto links should be used on anchors that explicitly indicate that they're email addresses, either by their format (donald@duck.com) or their wording (send email to customer support). Don't place mailto links on names; clicking on people's names should usually lead to their biography. Again, interaction design must meet users' expectations. The more that things behave consistently, the more users understand what they can do and the greater their sense of system mastery. Violated expectations create a sense of oppression, where technology rules humans and reduces their ability to steer the interaction. Cartoons by Doug Sheppard and Katrin L. Salyers The Growing Importance of Email Integration It's interesting to note that the last three mistakes all relate to email. Despite being the oldest of the main Internet services, email continues to be one of the most important. It's also finally becoming better integrated with the Web, and I expect that this trend will continue (if websites can avoid making those mistakes, that is).
    --
    It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  14. Fixed text size? Only because M$ broke it by metalhed77 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hmmm, that should be a hard one to do, because a
    <tag style="font-size:20px">
    should do nothing more than render the font with that height, but still allow it to be resized, my website http://www.andrewvc.com uses this and using mozilla I can resize all the text perfectly.

    Unfortuanatly, I just discovered that Internet Explorer 6 does not do and won't let me change the text size. Of what relevance is text in points to a web developer? As usual I expect all trolls to be bash me and tell me to use the standard. Well I don't care, no old people go to my site.

    --
    Photos.
    1. Re:Fixed text size? Only because M$ broke it by battjt · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Does anyone with a monster graphics card jacked up to max resolution use your site?

      I like using large fonts on high resolution; it looks nice. Small fonts are too small to read on my monitor.

      (I'm 31 and have better than 20/20 eyes.)

      Joe

      --
      Joe Batt Solid Design
  15. Bigger Mistake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Not letting people post their extremely witty comments anonymously so they can not look like an ass with their fake name attached to it.

  16. Web designers competence improves? by varjag · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At least if we take the common design mistakes as the metric.

    'Poor email intergration' sounds pretty sophisticated compared to 'don't use the <blink> tag'.

    --
    Lisp is the Tengwar of programming languages.
  17. browser type by Khopesh · · Score: 5, Interesting

    how about sites that think mozilla can't render something?
    nothing quite as annoying as
    "you need Internet Explorer 5+ or Netscape 6.2.2+ to view this site"
    ...especially when mozilla 1.3a gets blocked but netscape 6.2.2 doesn't!

    solution: some browsers allow you to change the userAgent.
    in mozilla, the prefbar plugin allows this (among other things).

    --
    Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
  18. a pet peeve by mmcshane · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Fixed Font Size Style sheets unfortunately give websites the power to disable a Web browser's "change font size" button and specify a fixed font size. About 95% of the time, this fixed size is tiny, reducing readability significantly for most people over the age of 40. Respect the user's preferences and let them resize text as needed. Also, specify font sizes in relative terms -- not as an absolute number of pixels.

    OK, this is not the fault of stylesheets. Internet Explorer does not allow the "zooming" of fonts set with pixel sizes. This is a shortcoming of Internet Explorer, not CSS. If this is so important to Nielsen (and I can see why it would be - my vision isn't so great either), perhaps he should look into using alternative browsers (Opera and Moz-based browsers all allow font zooming regardless of how the font size was set).
  19. Re:They missed websites that are just unnavigable by sgage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "A tactit commenly employed is to group products by the model name"

    Yes indeed, quite annoying. Even more annoying to me is when you go to a site for information about a product, click on the "products" link, and are made to choose between "home", "small business", and "enterprise". I just want to see the products and their specs! Don't worry about why! Just tell me what you've got, and I'll make my own goddam decisions!

    Sheesh.

    - S

  20. Re:Numero Uno ... by thomas.galvin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Number three
    A home page that is just a logo to click on to go to the real home page. It is often large, slow and adds nothing (good) to the experience
    Number four
    Flash


    I used to feel the same way you do; actually, I still feel the same way you do. When I hit the net, it's usually because I am looking for something particular, and the more hoops/pluggins I have to jump through to get to it, the more unhappy I become.

    When I talk to the people that use my site, on the other hand, I find that at least a good number of them like the "ooh, shiney" parts of the web. I've actually had people ask me to restore the flash intro that the guy who ran the site before me made.

    I find that splash pages (the ones that link to the "real" hompage) act almost like the cover of a book. People process images much more uickly than they do written words, and a splash page allows you make a more reliable first impression than some other methods; and if you compress your images, there is no reason it should take more than a few seconds to load. A splash page, properly compressed, can come in at under 40k.

    I think the hallmark of good design these days is to wrap functionality in a pretty package; make sure that your site is useful/useable, but also make it attractive enough that your users know you care about both your content and their experience.

  21. Why users hate horizontal scrolling by Tim+Macinta · · Score: 5, Insightful
    3. Horizontal Scrolling
    Users hate scrolling left to right. Vertical scrolling seems to be okay, maybe because it's much more common.
    Or how about because horizontal scrolling forces you to scroll once for every line you read while vertical scrolling only forces you to scroll once for every page you want to read? So, there's generally more than an order of mangitude less scrolling required with vertical scrolling than with horizontal scrolling.
  22. Reason why the site is slow... by mttlg · · Score: 4, Informative

    As many people have mentioned, the site hosting this article is straining under the load of geeks looking for more material to turn into running gags. I think I managed to find the reason for this site's poor performance - a lack of high speed internet access.

    From Nielsen's Law of Internet Bandwidth (1998):

    Nielsen's Law of Internet bandwidth states that:

    • a high-end user's connection speed grows by 50% per year
    • you don't get to use this added bandwidth to make your Web pages larger until 2003

    The dots in the diagram show the various speeds with which I have connected to the Net, from an early acoustic 300 bps modem in 1984 to an ISDN line today. It is amazing how closely the empirical data fits the exponential growth curve for the 50% annualized growth stated by Nielsen's Law.

    ...

    Starting about 2003, high-end users will have speeds corresponding to a personal T-1 line.

    ...

    Of course, low-end users will be on ISDN lines in 2003, so high-end users' megabit access will still not sanction bloated design. Looking even further ahead, Nielsen's Law does predict that the Web will be 57 times faster in ten years.

    It is amazing how easy it is to get an accurate approximation of the trend of internet connectivity speed from seven data points representing one person's internet connection speed over a span of 15 years.

    So the site might not be responding well right now, but at least we get broadband next year...

  23. How about denying access to pop-up add blockers? by Zerbey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having to enable pop-up adds in Mozilla is a big pain for those websites that refuse to load unless I do so. Fortunately, it is only a very small number of web site thus far.

    Yes, I recognise this is how web sites make their money but a discreet advert in the corner of your site is much better than slamming a window in front of your site.

  24. Re:They missed websites that are just unnavigable by parc · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My wife works for a not-to-be-named textbook company. Their online companion to one of their books was getting incredibly poor remarks. She was in a group working on the problem, so she asked to see the site map. The answer from the web-design group was "site map? We don't have one." So she clarified that she was talking about a design site map. They didn't have one of those, either.

    I wonder how many sites with no site map actually don't even have a design map? I would venture quite a few. Web design is similar to software enginerring: without a good plan, you're gonna get crap out of the process.

  25. Looooooong URLs by FTL · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From the (slashdotted) article:
    URL > 75 Characters Long URLs break the Web's social navigation because they make it virtually impossible to email a friend a recommendation to visit a Web page. If the URL is too long to show in the browser's address field, many users won't know how to select it. If the URL breaks across multiple lines in the email, most recipients won't know how to glue the pieces back together. The result? No viral marketing, just because your URLs are too long. Bad way to lose business.

    There are two side points to this:

    1. To shorten your addresses and make your URLs more durable to change, point your links to www.foobar.com, NOT to www.foobar.com/default.htm (or index.jsp, or whatever).
    2. Don't invoke sessions unless absolutely needed. Sometimes these are in the URL, sometimes they are cookies. It is irritating to copy a URL, mail it to someone, and find that they can't access it because it is relying on a session which expired (in the case of a URL) or a session which their computer doesn't have (in the case of a cookie).
    One kludge to get around massively long URLs is to use a service like ShortURL. Neat idea. But definitely a hack.
    --
    Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.