Web Pages That Suck - learn good web design by looking at bad web design


Worst Websites of the Year

Worst Websites of the Year: 2012-2005

bad websites are like sinking shipsWorst Websites
of 2012

Worst Websites of 2011

Worst Websites of 2010

Worst Websites of 2009

Worst Websites of 2008

Worst Websites of 2007

Worst Websites of 2006

Worst Websites of 2005

Daily Dose of Bad Design (Daily Sucker)

Current Examples of Bad Web Design Presented Daily (direct link)

Bad Web Design

Overview (direct link)

Good Web Design

Web Design Checklists


opens in new window
My Google + Page

subscribe to my rss feed
Subscribe to RSS feed

Follow me on Twitter
Follow me on Twitter


Everything Else

The Daily Sucker - Current examples of bad web design

The Daily Sucker

Sites featured in articles like Worst Websites of 2010 often are redesigned, which explains why some sites mentioned in my articles don't match their current look. The Daily Sucker features current examples of bad web design which haven't been fixed (yet).

If you see a site that you think sucks, email the URL to me. No personal pages (personal pages are supposed to reflect the individual's personality and artistic freedom) or web site designers (it would look like a conflict of interest), or others of their ilk.

If I think there's some merit to your selection, I may post it along with some commentary. If you know of a site that qualifies, let me know.

mCover – Example of Bad Web Design for June 7, 2011

June 6th, 2011 8:08 pm by Vincent Flanders

Submitter’s comments: iPearl is source page for mCover, and produce third party covers and protective cases for laptops, e-readers, and so on.

My main objection, apart from the fact that the page looks like it was designed 15 years ago and never updated, is the fact that it WAS updated and yet looks poos. Most of the low quality images of the devices they provide covers for has a mouse-over with some information and more low quality images of the same products. And by low quality I mean they seem to have stripped the colour depth out of the pictures for some reason so instead of gentle shading they you see spots of different shades . There is drop-down box in the top right to let you jump straight to a product, in my case Amazon Kindle, and lo! there are further web pages with animated gifs in low quality images, and far too much text.

I was going to pull this email and not send it once I saw, hidden at the top of the home page, a link for their new site (umm, whatever happened to redirects?). But then I looked at it too.

While it does look better the same low quality images are there, among a few more fundamental errors, like showing the wrong product in the image (there is a Kindle 2 in the picture for a Kindle 3 product).

Biggest issues with these sites:

  • Low quality images
  • Text in images (why? why put text in an image and then shrink the image? WHY?)
  • Animated gifs
  • Terrible text colour choice
  • Overall design

And, why, if there is a new site that is intended to take over from the old site, isn’t the old site decommissioned and a redirect put in place?

I think they just don’t seem to be marketing themselves very well at all. I will admit they seem to have learned a bit between the iPearl-inc site and the mCover site, but it’s still not great, and there are some fundamental problems they haven’t fixed.

Personally I’d not give them my money until they correct the rest of their web issues.

Vincent Flanders’ comments: This is a stereotypical situation. The company—which probably makes/sells good products—has a website that gives the impression they make/sell crap. If it’s not Rule #1, it’s close to it—people want to do business with people who look professional.

I’d also add that there are serious text contrast issues.

mCover (old site)

mCover (new site)

Posted in Daily Sucker, Usability, Web Design, Worst Web Sites |