Biggest Mistakes in Web Design 1995-2015
Worst Web Sites
Ugliest / Worst Business Web Sites of 2009, But You Can Learn Something From Them
Ugliest / Worst Business Web Sites of 2009
Ugliest / Worst Business Web Sites to Navigate in 2009
Ugliest / Worst Web Sites of 2009: Honorary Winners
Ugliest / Worst Over The Top Web Sites of 2009
Ugliest / Worst Non-Profit Web Sites of 2009
Ugliest / Worst Web Pages of the Decade
Gorgeous Websites From The
Late 90's To Inspire You — If You
Have No Taste
Web Redesign Checklists
Biggest Mistakes in Web Design 1995-2015
Daily Sucker - Current Examples of Bad Design
Subscribe to RSS feed
More Bad Web Design Techniques
Stupid Versions of WPTS Home Page
Worst Web Sites of 2009: July - October #1-10
Web design is an art. Great web design occurs when design and content are seamless and you don't notice its greatness. With great web design, it's easy to find the information you need. The content makes you want to return again and again and, most importantly, great design gives credibility to the company/organization.
Obviously, the sites that follow aren't examples of great web design and we have two more months to go.
1. Haiti News Network
Submitter's comments: It's Christmas in Haiti! A Haitian News Network site. O….M….G.
Vincent Flanders' comments: Mother Mary save us!!!! There are only two possible reasons this site won't make the final list of the worst sites of 2009:
- They fix the site.
- My clever, clever readers discover and send in a whole bunch of sites that are worse than today's sucker. Frankly, this possibility scares me more than a proctologist with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder.
At least today's site doesn't use sound files. Actually, I'm not sure because I was too scared to click any links. If the home page sucks this much, what hope is there for any of the subpages? This site doesn't just suck, it's the black hole of f**cking death.
If you're one of those folks who think that the glass is half-full, you'll be comforted by the thought that web design in Haiti has nowhere to go but up. I'm not sure which of the following two statements from the great movie reviewer Mr. Cranky applies to the Haiti News Network:
- “This is so godawful that it ruptures the very fabric of space and time with the sheer overpowering force of its mediocrity.”
- “Proof that Jesus died in vain.”
Wait. I know which one is the right phrase — It's the black hole of f**cking death.
Other comments #1: What's not to love about this site? It has annoying GIF animations, Mystery Meat Navigation, marquees, awful contrast, etc. Is this supposed to be a site about a serious News Network??
Other comments #2: This site is so bad, it simply cannot be "fixed," that is, without the aid of a flight of F-4's armed with napalm. Bella Desoto, look out; you have competition for the worst web site ever!
Other comments #3: Well at least the background doesn't make you want to stab your eyes out…but that's all I can say for it. Most of the things on the page don't actually link to another page on the site — 90% link to other sites. As far as why anyone would want to "Keep it alive"…the only reason I can think of is just so that it can stay around till the worst web sites of the year are decided here. This isn't an actual news site, it's just a whole bunch of unorganized and random links.
2. Xerox
Submitter's comments: There are too many web sites I can't really read because the text isn't dark enough. I'm older (63) with some eye problems, but I spend large sums of money on products for my company and I research them on the web. I'd at least like to be able to read about what I'm buying. I find Xerox's home page difficult to read. If you mouse over the “Document Outsourcing” link at the top, you get black text on a dark purple background.
Vincent Flanders' comments: The harder it is to read a web page the easier it becomes for your visitors to hit the BACK button and go to a site they can read. In order to read a web page, you need enough contrast between the text color and the background color. This isn't rocket science. I'll even give you a simple guide that shows which shades of black to use for text on a white background.
Why do designers do that voodoo that they do so well? In an article entitled Has Your Web Designer Ever Heard of Contrast? a plausible explanation is given:
The reason is… gray text looks better and more coherent when seen from a distance or as an element of the overall design, but, and this is a big but, it is not meant to be read in these cases…
…Unfortunately, some visual designers sacrifice readability for a slight increase in visual appeal because they do not really read the text on the screen; they treat it as a large block of horizontal lines, and the darker those lines are the uglier they look. So, decreasing the contrast a little makes the overall design look nicer but less readable. Poor readability is not the designer's problem. After all, he will probably never try to use the site he designed.
I noted that recent Daily Sucker, TechSoup (who also makes this list as #9), was using #666 for some of their text, which made it difficult to read. I noticed that today's sucker, Xerox, also uses #666 for sections of their text. As the submitter mentioned, mousing over the “Document Outsourcing” link is not pleasant. It gets worse. The Xerox for Small and Medium Businesses page adds hard-to-read link colors.
It seemed to me like important web sites were all conspiring at the same time. Perhaps I felt this way because A&E and the History Channel have been running shows about the end of the world with predictions from Nostradamus, the Aztecs, and everybody and his brother and watched too many of them.
Then it hit me. The number 666 is the Number of the Beast. This is all coming to me as a revelation on…9-9-9, which is “666″ inverted. Yes, Nostraflanders has uncovered a plot on this special day to ruin web sites. #666 is Satan's CSS! If you don't believe me, look at the photo above. This is proof!
In the movie The Usual Suspects, the character Verbal Kint says, “The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.”
At Web Pages That Suck, Nostraflanders says, “The second greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing web designers the people could read text colored #666.”
3.Cafe Intl
Submitter's comments: This is the most annoying web site ever! Try to check out their menu. You have to chase everything around and then try to position it so that you can read it, section by section. If you want to find their hours, try the “About” page which displays the tiniest type ever!
Vincent Flanders' comments: Whenever someone sends me an email with the words “the most annoying web site ever!” or “the worst web site in the world!” my first reaction is not to believe them. After all, I've seen tens of thousands — if not hundreds of thousands — of horrible web sites. My second reaction is to say to myself, “Hey. They might be right.”
Well, s/he is right. Today's Daily Sucker may be one of the most annoying web sites ever. Somebody got Flash happy and wanted to show off all the little tricks they learned. To appreciate the madness, you have to choose one of the moving items — Breakfast, Lunch, Catering, or Specials. Then it gets interesting. Using IE 8, every spot on the floating billboard filled up with shimmering information (you have to see it to understand). Using IE 7, I only got a couple of menu items if I clicked the billboard. With Firefox 3.5, I couldn't get the page to load and with Safari, it loaded correctly. That's the problem. When it loads correctly, you get a case of the dry heaves because the shimmering text gives you vertigo. Here's a video I made of the site. This is the link for YouTube fans.
What amazes me most is that somebody — or a group of people — signed off on the site. Maybe they all took that new brain pill from Greece — Blakeia.
Other comments #1: Yes, Mr. Web Designer, I get it. You are clever. The design looks cool. Now here's the problem: I did not come to the web site to find out how clever you are or how cool your stuff looks. I came to the web site to buy something, or to donate money, or to find out where you are so I can buy something. Or maybe I was looking for information on how to keep myself well or fix something. Or maybe I was already unhappy and came to the web site to find out how to get a refund or get something repaired.
None of these scenarios is made better by knowing how clever you are, or how cool the site looks. They're not made worse either, unless your attempt to look clever and cool INTERFERES WITH MY ATTEMPT TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT I CAME HERE FOR.
Unless your site is like most of my web sites (personal, experimental, or inside joke), people are coming to your site to get something done. Don't get in the way.
Other comments #2: I like the UI of the menu pages, but it's the totally wrong application of it. Because you have to click on the texty squares to see what they say, they are essentially 'mystery meat.' Why doesn't the home page say where the restaurant is? Or show a picture of it?
Other comments #3: The idiotic Flash loader animation stalled at 50%. Very bad; try again guys. I am not going to wait to see what surprises you have for me. I'm outta here.
Other comments #4: The problem is that this site would be perfectly fine for a completely different industry. If it was a promotional marketing site, the Papervision3D Flash tricks (which are pretty specialised... is easy once you have access to the library) would be fine and dazzling. But as it stands, this is not the kind of site that really needs Flash.
The site isn't exactly terrible from a navigational point of view and the actual theme of the site is professionally executed. It's just a shame that a single movement of the mouse cause the entire layout to change, and that when you try to read the menu, you're obstructed by low-quality JPGs on the gallery (lack of selectable text on something like a menu is a cardinal sin in my book).
I've heard worse background music in my time (at least we're on jazz MP3 loops rather than tinny MIDI versions of "Stairway to Heaven" now...), but, again, it's not necessary on a site about a restaurant chain.
All in all, it's a well executed site, but it's like performing a double somersault at a board meeting — impressive, but in completely the wrong place, which is its true reason for sucking.
4. The Light of God Ministry
Submitter's comments: It's bad and it's bonkers, which are two of your favourites. I actually struggled to find a ‘How to tell if your web site sucks' rule it doesn't break. I guess there isn't a FlashSplash page. Oh, and no Mystery Meat Navigation (although it is almost unreadable), but other than that, it's a pretty full house.
My favourite quote from the site is from ‘the real truth about god’ page, ‘God is coming – and he is mad;' probably mostly about this piss-poor web site.
Vincent Flanders' comments: God, how I love people who know how to turn a phrase — “It's bad and it's bonkers, which are two of your favourites.”
I like over-the-top web sites and I'm sure today's sucker will join them. My favorite part of this sucker? The left and right columns of text are centered, while the center column text is flush left. For some reason, it just seems funny in an ironic way.
BTW, the site says the 7 years of tribulation starts December 14, 2012. I hate to break the news, but according to the History Channel's shows (about Nostradamus and the Mayans), the world is going to end on December 21, 2012. I guess if you have accrued vacation time, you might want to plan to use it up before then <grin>.
Other comments #1: I am a Christian; nut job doctrine like this frustrates and embarrasses me because it diverts attention from things that really matter. As a Web developer, web sites like this frustrate and embarrass me because it is thoughtless and inept at almost every step. Bad doctrine and poor web design are both born out of ignorance. There really is no excuse for either, although both can be forgiven.
Other comments #2: Yahoo! page builder at its best (or worst). 'God' might punish you if you don't repent by 2012, but Vincent Flanders will punish you if you don't fix your web site!
5. Pizza Capers
Submitter's comments: I'm a first-time reader of your web site and I'm finding it very informative – and amusing. There is one web site I'd like to submit for your consideration, due to a misplaced use of metaphors and a high dependence on Flash: Pizza Capers.
The hand cursor and the basil/chili plants that swing if you put the mouse over them, but otherwise do nothing, are just idle distractions. Try taking a look at the menu – you have to go through every page by grabbing the bottom right corner of the page, dragging it halfway across the screen, and let it go. If I wanted to thumb through a menu, I'd go into the place and thumb through the menu. This is why I ended up using the PDF version.
And the ‘capertron’ part of their ‘order online’ section is still ‘coming soon.' On the other hand, their pizzas are excellent – they're the only place I'd order takeaway pizza.
Vincent Flanders' comments: As I said yesterday (October 27) about Mellow Mushroom:
Pizza Parlors are Yet Another Industry That Sucks (YAITS). This site is a little more high-end than others of its ilk and uses Flash where it could just as easily use HTML.
Although the submitter is somewhat inaccurate — you can also click on the corner of the page to change it — the real question is, “Why in God's name would you want to use a book metaphor?” You're wasting time because visitors are going to forget where certain items they may want to order are located. What does this buy you?
What really ticked me off is that I couldn't figure how to close the menu once I opened it. I couldn't go anywhere else. Clicking at various spots on the home page didn't work. Another bad feature of Flash that's used at Pizza Capers is that when you mouse over certain icons, Flash sound files are activated.
Once again, it's important to notice that a sucky web site does not translate into a sucky product; however, if a person's only experience with your product is your web site, you're in trouble. What we have here is a site that's F.U.C.K.E.D — Flash Used to Corrupt Knowledge of Effective Decisionmaking.
Worst of all, not everything is viewable on my 1900- x 1170-pixel window, as this screen shot demonstrates. OMG! I was just playing around with the home page and discovered that the only way to see everything on the home page is to click and drag and hand cursor. This site is a black hole of f*****g death. Here's a video of the whole mess.
Other comments #1: This site is like an obstacle. You go to the site to order pizza (to get information), instead you're harassed by a design format that expects you to learn how to use it. Flash sites are not practical. Any good web designer should realize that Flash should only be used on arty sites and for games. It should not be used on a site where a user may have to use it for some practical everyday use (order food, view menu etc.). Also, what's up with the draggable board? Why provide a top menu when I can just drag the board? With all the interactivity and hidden features this site has, I was half expecting the hand to give me the finger.
Other comments #2: That stupid navigation metaphor died years ago, folks. As well, a web site that makes unexpected, useless little noises when you touch things is appealing only to the folks that built and paid for it. I am getting so @#%#%&!^ tired of designers who think that Flash is all you need to produce a good site, not to mention owners who seemingly have money to waste on such junk. This site is a marvelous example of ill-conceived and poorly executed web design; a testament to the ignorance of both the site owner and the builder. Site owners and builders may like this sort of thing, but they consistently forget about addressing what their customers are coming to the site for — to get information or buy something, not to be amused by your cute idea and low-grade creativity.
Other comments #3: Is the severed hand available as a topping?
On a more serious note, I work in retail and an alarmingly large number of suppliers (=any) use the 'flipping page metaphor' Flash bit for their online catalogs. These include some companies which do large volume business with major department stores, as well as smaller companies who will probably remain small because of that.
Part of the culprit is a number of companies which offer programs that will conveniently translate print catalog files into those imbecilic customer repulsion engines (most page layout software offers options to translate the pages directly into HTML which, while not a useful or efficient method of organizing a web site, is at least HTML).
The images are all good quality and, if I had a Jumbotron for a monitor, maybe even the layout would be pretty. But as you say, Vincent, crap on fine china is still crap. Or, in this case, crap on a pie pan in regular, large and giant with gourmet toppings.
6. Rocky Creek ATV Trail
Submitter's comments: I saw this site and wanted to shout out ”Sunday! Sunday! Sunday! Mud Boggin! Bring the kiddies!”
It has animated GIFs, rotating text, loud colors, jumbled blocks of text on the pages and a strange arrangement of menu items. Most sites put the link to the home page at the top of the menu!
Vincent Flanders' comments: You've got to be kidding me! There's a 90,672,768 byte media file that downloads when you visit the page. The video serves no purpose and should be removed. There's no reason this video should exist. This is just bad design. Speaking of bad design, the whole site is a classic example of Mistake #5 from Biggest Mistakes in Web Design 1995-2015 —"Have you ever seen another web site? Really? Doesn't look like it." I call this type of design the “I haven't taken my antipsychotics in a while school of web design.”
Gee. I've never seen the word “Contactus” before. Is that some Roman god?
7. Hermès
Submitter's comments: I don't have much comment on this site. Maybe it's my bad, but I'm totally lost in the navigation. After desperately clicking everywhere to skip the starting animation, I discovered that the “?” pops up a window where you can read information about direct navigation. It only takes a couple of minutes to read and memorize… Little squares, gallop, left-and-right, animated and always disappearing menu made me close the site, though I know it has an article somewhere I wanted to read.
Vincent Flanders' comments: Yes, I know this is a fashion site and they probably should be exempt because fashion is about appearance and not reality. However, even in my most socialistic, class-hating moments, I find it impossible to believe that rich people (the target audience) would put up with this nonsense.
Yes, this site is beautiful, but it's unusable. It's like using fine china to serve crap. This web site may easily be the Worst Site of 2009 and could be one the worst web sites of this century.
Other comments #1: And just how long did it take for you to determine that it is a fashion site? I spent 30 seconds fuggling with that idiotic navigation and said "to hell with this", and left the site.
Update: OK, I think I understand; it's another of those "stroke the owner's ego" sites that really has no other purpose, since they obviously don't actually expect to sell anything. I bet they don't even have a machine that dispenses wine...
Other comments #2: Holy s**t! What a complete waste of time and energy. Does this business actually want to sell something? I would say NOT. It must have taken months and months to figure out how to make this site so crappy. You would think that they might accidentally screw up and put something on there that actually made sense...but no. They succeeded in making the worst possible web site with what they had to work with.
I find it hard to believe that the creator of this site wouldn't get pissed off trying to navigate through it. Maybe he shot straight up out of bed shortly after the site launched shrieking, "My god, what have I done?" If he didn't, then this man, woman, whoever had absolutely no conscience. I'd like to see him in charge of PETA's web site. Where do I click to save baby seals? Oh well, club 'em.
Other comments #3: There are three rules in web design:
- First rule of web site design, don't ask people to learn how to use your site.
- Second rule of web site design, don't ask people to learn how to use your site.
- Third rule of web site design, if this is your first time visiting Hermès, you must click the back button and leave.
Other comments #4: The linked site is so stupid. You click the cologne lid, watch 30 seconds of nonsense, and learn nothing. I clicked the dominoes, only to wait for it to reload exactly the same picture: rather a lot of the mouse-over hands lead nowhere. Slowly. The store site is better, but still full of pretentious nonsense. Why is "life in a pocket" a tie?
8. All Star Farm
Submitter's comments: The only reason I know about this site is because it came up as an ad in Gmail, meaning that someone actually paid real money to advertise this web site. I've spent two years building a web site for our business that I'm not ashamed of (most of the time). This site makes me want to put my eyes out with a hoof pick…
I'm sure my wife could chime in on the horsie aspect of it, but that's a different blog…
Vincent Flanders' comments: This is an incredibly tacky looking site. I just love that allstarfarm.com redirects to angelfire.com. Nothing says “professional” like redirecting your domain to a free web site. Yes, I know we're in an econopocalypse (a word I borrowed from the submitter's email), but you can't look cheap. I also love the star that follows your cursor. I'm thinking about using one of my head shots as a cursor. Is that scary or what?
On the other hand…this site is about fantasy horses and I can make the case that this gold-gilded Gorgon is exactly what the audience for this type of product expects. That's why I said, “Maybe It's The Daily Sucker.” Obviously, most businesses would do well not to use this site as a template.
Other comments #1: My colleague (after seeing the home page picture): "Is that a web site about horse spanking?"
Other comments #2: What's with the trail of stars that follows the cursor on the splash page? Then again, what's with the splash page itself? It's completely pointless. Of course, did anyone notice that if you go up exactly one directory from the home page you end up at some weird half-white and grey blankish page which has nothing to do with anything else? This page has a ton of links to what appears to be pages on the site, but they go nowhere and then show an error page in an iFrame. I guess the owners tried to cover up their past web site by moving their 'newer' site one level down in the directory:
9. TechSoup
Vincent Flanders' comments: TechSoup is the technology site for non-profits and it's hugely important. I trust that if you work for a 501(c)3 organization, you're getting your technology products from TechSoup. I hope you're getting a lot of your information from them, too. If you're not, you're either stealing software, using outdated software, or somebody's paying too much.
Their previous site's design was…functional. It certainly didn't have “a real pretty mouth.” What it did have, for the most part, was readability. You could easily read the text (well, 97.86% of the text). The problem occurred when you put white text on that puke-gold (#cc9900) background.
Well, TechSoup decides its time for a redesign (here's the new home page) and, while they managed not to succumb to a lot of temptations to suck up their site, they had to get artsy with their text color. I don't know why designers are in love with grayish text (#666666) on a white background. Maybe they're on Macs and the color looks great. PC laptop screens also can give a distorted view of text color.
On the day I checked out the contrast on the new TechSoup home page using AccessColor, I received the following report:
The W3C recommends a standard of 500 or greater for the color difference and a standard of 125 or greater for color brightness.
Based on these considerations, the results for this page are:
- Both color difference and color brightness do not meet the recommended standard for 0% of the total text.
- Either color difference or color brightness does not meet the recommended standard for 69.32% of the total the text. A Warning message is displayed next to the HTML source line.
Text on background with images is for 20.31% of the total text.
Like the good, pre-Vatican II Catholic I'm not, I ran a test to see what color I could make the text before it became a mortal sin (bad contrast). TechSoup uses #666666 for its text so, logically, I tried #555555. I'm a genius. It worked.
Personally, I don't think #555555 is dark enough to make text really legible. “Legally,” it works, but this is 2009. Black is beautiful. Let's make black text the new black text. Let's make our text #000000.
10. Clo
Submitter's comments: I guess I just really don't get the fact that to read anything on the page, the user has to horizontally scroll instead of down like a normal web site…I'm sure there's more about it that sucks pretty hard. For a bar that prides itself on being pretty edgy (it's the only bar in the world with no bartenders — and a touch screen menu), their web site is pretty…blah looking.
Vincent Flanders' comments: Strange. I thought horizontal scrolling was a thing of the past. Obviously, it isn't. Once again, we have contrast problems. The Halloween-themed black text on the orange background is difficult to read and lack of contrast is listed as the 3rd biggest mistake in my article Biggest Mistakes in Web Design 1995-2015:
According to Wikipedia: “Contrast is the difference in visual properties that makes an object (or its representation in an image) distinguishable from other objects and the background.” According to Vincent Flanders: “Without proper contrast, visitors to your site can't read the text and if they can't read it, they will leave it.” Here's a web site that gives a really great explanation of the need for contrast — and it's visual.
C'mon.
Other comments #1: To me, this is Web 2.0 gone bad. Someone tried too hard to be hip and trendy in an overly minimalist way, and produced a site that is visually dull and not very informative (at least within the first few seconds ).
The horizontal scrolling is such a stupid, rookie thing thatI almost think it is intentional, just to be different. On a good monitor, the contrast isn't great, but doesn't seem that bad.
I guess what bugs me is the site's content...where is it? While one can guess that the site is about wine, one's first impression certainly does not confirm it. The image gallery seems a bit...no, totally...specious.
Upon reflection, I guess that the site is most definitely not there to attract customers; they certainly don't want ME there. Maybe it's there to make current customers feel privileged and to stroke the egos of the site owners.
Finally, I simply refuse to accept the idea of having a machine dispense my wine. This totally eviscerates the age-old experience of enjoying fine wine. I want a congenial, knowledgeable wine steward/waiter to serve my wine; not some machine from Star Trek. Actually, I guess it really isn't about the wine at all; It's about seeing and being seen with a serving of wine as one's prop.
Other comments #2: The previous comment hit the nail on the head when he said that this web site seems to exist "to stroke the egos of the site owners." That may explain why so many web sites suck — the owners are so caught up in patting themselves on the back "lookit me, me kewl, me own web site" that they overlook that it sucks big time. Why else would rational beings foist such nonsense on the long-suffering world? I think "built to stroke the owner's ego" needs to be right next to "looks like you've never seen another web site" in Vincent's lists of sins.
Other comments #3: One of the ugliest, most useless sites yet. Definitely a candidate for top ten of the year. Side scrolling is useful for a photo gallery now that processor speed has increased so dramatically and is preferable to a separate gallery page on an entertainment fan site. We've all seen the old, slow click-by-click gallery pages.
Unless the visitor hovers the mouse on this gallery, the pause and continue buttons won't be seen. All that said, the viewer should have total viewing control of a gallery and side scrolling is the only way to deliver the speed and convenience required. I usually format all my pages so that the body of the page can be easily printed out while the margins are reserved for off-site web sites. But on star pages, I use the right margin thumbnail space to partially reveal a photo of the appropriate actor/actress. The method was test marketed and found to be intuitive.
