October 21, 2007
E-consultancy has an amusing list/rant of top 10 web site annoyances.
Although many of these items have been brought up before, it's never a bad thing to be reminded of what not to do.
While I agree with most of the points raised, I disagree about the use of 'intrusive' advertising such as overlays and interstitials on some sites.
Of course, I would rather that these forms of advertising did not exist.
However, I understand that as people expect content to be provided for free and users increasingly suffer from banner blindness, marketers are having to move to more intrusive forms of advertising in order to be sure that their ads are being seen.
I'd also like to add a couple of my own peeves to the list.
One method I often use to assess how well a site is built and managed is to try out the search.
If the results number in the hundreds, are poorly presented, and lack relevance then I know that the site owner has not spent much time thinking about the web site's usability.
It's even more of a red flag if the search results page shows a percentage relevancy number for each result — you know, result #4 is 58% relevant while result #5 is only 52% relevant. What does this information actually mean and how is it supposed to be used?!
This was a useless feature when it was introduced 10+ years ago and it remains so today. Get rid of it.
One of the easiest ways to improve the design and usability of your web site is to have good typography. That's why it's so frustrating when I come across sites that suffer from small text, cramped paragraphs and lists, and hard-to-read text and link colors.
There are so many examples of good typography on the web — MSNBC, The New York Times (funny Stephen Colbert column), Slate, and Time to name just a few — that there's really no excuse for poor typography.
It's also easier than ever to compare fonts and typographic layout than ever.
That's my 2c. Any more pet peeves to add to the list?
Posted on: October 21, 2007 | 4 Comments