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.

Chef in a box – An Example of Bad Web Design for April 18, 2013

April 17th, 2013 9:09 pm by Vincent Flanders

The Daily Sucker

Submitter’s comments: I found this website from an ad in a website that is about genuine food. I trusted the ad, thinking the website must be good if it’s on this type of website.

However, upon seeing the site I see only: “click to read.” Then I see lots of buttons, making me feel that using the website is complicated.

Then I actually read the content. The content does not suck.

Apparently, the website is done is a format which is used in newspapers that you can read on the Internet and catalogs for websites that sell stuff.

The website is unusual in that it has no content except for the “click to read” part. Usually, you can read the content immediately.

Did I mention the website’s content uses words that I don’t know what they mean—even if Swedish is one of my two native languages?

The website uses a mechanism where the website can be scrolled up and down and to the sides, which I don’t know if that exists on other websites.

Vincent Flanders’ comments: What’s wrong with this site can be summed up in three words: “Flash. Flash. Flash.” Geez.

Chef in a box

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