Web Pages That Suck -- Examples of Bad Web Design

These are the Daily Suckers -- Examples of Bad Web Design -- from WebPagesThatSuck.com. I couldn't predict every new sucky design technique that would come along when I wrote the book because there's always a new way to do something bad. This page will keep you up-to-date. Live examples.

My definition of "daily" is "whenever I'm in the mood."


Date Friday, June 25, 2004

Their e-mail: There wasn't any. One of the fundraisers in the Seattle area who I respect most asked me to do her a favor and consult with this homeless group about their future web site. Like most people, they sat down and started coding without planning out what they wanted their site to say. The organization's founder told me he really liked the look of this one site and wanted to know what I thought.

My comments: OK, here goes. Besides the two written rules (I don't critique personal sites or sites that obviously belong to web design firms) I have the following unwritten rules:

  1. I don't review church, cult, weirdo new age sites .
  2. I don't review any site that I feel you really shouldn't visit -- Multi-Level-Marketing, porn, scam artist, etc.
  3. I don't like to review sites in the Seattle-area. I have to live here and it's still a small town.

The gentleman from the homeless shelter liked Mars Hill Church and wanted his site to look like it -- but not a copy. Hopefully, I talked him out of it for the following reasons:

  1. Flash. Non-profit web sites have to look good -- but not too good. You don't want to look like you can afford high-end web design. Donors get upset and I know of at least one case where a major donor left because their brochure looked too expensive.
  2. The menu system. Of course, it's Flash-based, but the worse part is what happens when you mouse over parts of it. It moves around.
  3. Links inside the menu system. If you're looking for "sermons", you have to click on "MP3/Audio" -- oh, yeah, that's exactly what I would do.
  4. It looks like no provision is made for non-Flash visitors. No Flash. No site. It also relies on Javascript. Oh. There's a horrible virus out on the web and to quote from Yahoo! News:

    Stephen Toulouse, a security program manager at Microsoft, recommended that computer owners obtain the latest security updates for Microsoft products and their anti-virus and firewall programs.

    Because one flaw has yet to be fixed, he said, users should also turn up security settings on Microsoft's Internet Explorer browsers to the highest levels.

    Security experts noted that users can avoid the exploit by using alternative browsers such as Mozilla and Opera. Users could also turn off the "Javascript" feature on their Microsoft browsers, though doing so cripple functions on some sites.

Well, it cripples this site. Now, there is a non-Flash version, but my browser (Mozilla) wasn't able to find it. If you can't find it, then it doesn't exist. Actually, if they used this version of the site -- with a better logo -- it would be greatly improved. Although the page tries to be XHTML compatible, it has 113 errors.

Yes, the design is "purty" but that's not what a web site is about.

Mars Hill Church

Friday, June 25, 2004

The Daily Sucker Backgrounder

The Daily Sucker contains material that should be considered updates to the book, "Web Pages That Suck." and Son of Web Pages That Suck. I can't see the future -- if I could, I'd be picking lottery numbers and stocks. The Daily Sucker features new sucky design techniques not in existence when the book was written. Since Web designers are stubborn, I also include old sucky techniques featured in the book. Maybe if they see a bad technique featured enough they'll stop using it.

The suckers are based on user input. You see a site that you think sucks and then e-mail the URL to me. No personal pages (personal pages are supposed to reflect the individual's personality, artistic freedom, and lack of taste -- a commercial site is about making money) or Web site designers (it would look like a conflict of interest). If I think there's some merit to your selection, I post it along with some commentary -- and quality commentary helps determine whether I use the suggestion. If you know of a site that qualifies, let me know.

The sucky example will usually be available for only 24 hours (or thereabouts -- weekends and egregious examples are exceptions) -- never to be seen again. Well, probably. Somebody could always suggest them again -- and they do.

E-mail Vincent