Web Design Predictions for 2011
January 6th, 2011 4:04 am by Vincent Flanders
Posted in Not a Daily Sucker, Usability, Web Design, You Should Read |
Worst Websites of the Year: 2012-2005
Current Examples of Bad Web Design Presented Daily (direct link)
Overview (direct link)
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.
January 6th, 2011 4:04 am by Vincent Flanders
Posted in Not a Daily Sucker, Usability, Web Design, You Should Read |
January 6th, 2011 3:03 am by Vincent Flanders
Catch the video. May be NSFW.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UW6DjmYGAaM
Posted in Daily Sucker, Usability, Web Design, Worst Web Sites |
January 4th, 2011 2:02 am by Vincent Flanders
Submitter’s comments: I thought you might like this site. It might be Latin or it’s just a template with lorem-ipsum generated text. I’m not sure, because the font is too small and I can’t read it. My personal favorite: the menu runs away when you try moving your mouse over it.
Vincent Flanders’ comments: WTF! This is Mystery Meat Navigation (MMN) at its worst. Well, it may not be the worst, because the worst is something I made up—Random Mystery Meat (see below)
Yes, I know there is regular text navigation at the bottom, but that doesn’t excuse the use of MMN.
This is so horrible, I’m putting it in at the “end” of 2010 and the beginning of 2011 so I can use it as an example of Worst Site of the Year.
Posted in Daily Sucker, Usability, Web Design, Worst Web Sites |
December 30th, 2010 9:09 pm by Vincent Flanders
If you’ve been to WPTS and read the articles, you’ll know that lack of contrast between the text and the background color upsets me for one simple reason:
I NEED TO BE ABLE TO READ WHAT’S ON THE F**KING PAGE.
You would think any designer whose IQ is higher than an ice cube understands this concept. Nope. Today’s Daily Sucker, adlucent, is unclear on the concept.
On the other hand, there are actually times when it’s permissible—even mandatory—for text to be unreadable. Scroll down and take a look at the footer of Wachovia Bank’s home page. The text color is #8B8B8B on a background of #FFFFFF, which fails the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. This is just one line of text from their footer that’s hard to read.
Important new FDIC insurance rules in effect from December 31, 2010 through
December 31, 2012. Learn More
Why would they want their customers to read and understand the new rules?
My current privacy page fails big time. My original privacy page is very readable.
Privacy pages, footers and important information that’s considered “the fine print” can be made hard to read. If you don’t want people reading your text, make the text small and lower the contrast.
Posted in Bad Business Practices, Usability, Web Design |
December 7th, 2010 4:04 pm by Vincent Flanders
Every musician (and web designer) should learn web marketing from the Drive By Truckers’ current site. Brilliant. Great site.
Posted in Not a Daily Sucker, You Should Read |