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.

Google Beats Apple And Apple Beats Google in Supporting HTML 5. IE Still Sucks.

June 8th, 2010 9:09 pm by Vincent Flanders

The HTML 5 Test is a really cool site that tells you how much HTML 5 support is built into your browser. With Apple screaming “We have the best HTML 5 support” I thought it would be logical to visit The HTML 5 Test and see who’s the real winner.

I went on Monday, June 7, the day Safari 5 was released. I went back on Tuesday and discovered that the test had been revised. The original test had 160 possible points, while the current test (released on Wednesday) has 300. I’ve broken the tests down by New (300 point scale) and Old (160 point scale). The score does not include bonus points

Score Test Points Browser Version
72.33% New 217 / 300 and 10 bonus points Google Chrome 6.0.922.0 dev
69.00% New 207 / 300 and 7 bonus points Apple Safari 5.0 (7533.16)
65.66% New 197 / 300 and 7 bonus points Google Chrome 5.0.375.70

5.0.375.70 beta


46.33% New 139 / 300 and 4 bonus points Mozilla Firefox 3.6.3
46.33% New 139 / 300 and 4 bonus points Opera 10.60
42.66% New 128 / 300 and 7 bonus points Apple Safari 4.0.5 (531.22.7)
12.33% New 37 / 300 and 0 bonus points Microsoft IE 8.0.6001.18904
10.66% New 32 / 300 and 1 bonus point Microsoft IE 1.9.7766.6000 Platform Preview
07.33% New 22 /300 and 0 bonus points Microsoft IE 7.0.5730.13
88.75% Old 142 / 160 Google Chrome 6.0.922.0 dev
86.25% Old 138 / 160 Apple Safari 5.0 (7533.16)
71.87% Old 115/ 160 Apple Safari 4.0.5 (531.22.7)
63.75% Old 102 / 160 Opera 10.60

Google can claim they beat Apple and offer better HTML 5 support, but that’s if you’re using the 6.0 developer version, which most of you shouldn’t be using.

Apple can claim they beat Google and offer better HTML 5 support with the current stable releases, which is probably a more accurate claim.

The truth is support is still pretty crappy. Speaking of crap, Microsoft’s IE 7 and 8 are POS when it comes to HTML 5. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know IE 9 is so much better, but nobody in their right mind would test it on their production machine. That’s assuming their production machine isn’t running XP because IE 9 won’t work on XP.

I’m too curious. I installed the IE 9 Platform Preview on my Vista laptop. IE 9 isn’t really a browser, but more of an HTML viewer. For one thing, you can install it alongside another version of IE. That’s really, really difficult to do in the real world.

As you see in the scores above, IE 9’s HTML 5 support is less than IE 8, but greater than IE 7. I’m not impressed. Here’s a screenshot showing the new, still limited support.

Posted in Bad Business Practices, Not a Daily Sucker, Software |

Yale School of Art – Example of Dickhead Web Design for Tuesday, May 25, 2010

May 25th, 2010 4:04 am by Vincent Flanders

Submitter’s comments: My friend sent this to me when she was looking into the college. You would think with all the money they get from tuition they would be able to afford a web page that wasn’t made by an 11-year old boy.

Vincent Flanders’ comments: I could excuse the page if it were designed by an 11-year old. I should excuse it because it’s for an art school but, because some irresponsible dickhead doesn’t understand that flashing colors could cause seizures, I have to make it a Daily Sucker. Oh. The word “irresponsible” in the phrase “irresponsible dickhead” is an unnecessary modifier.

What in the hell was s/he thinking? Hopefully, outing them might cause the page to be changed.

Yale School of Art (WARNING. Could cause seizures)

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

Whitehouse.gov – Example #1 of Bad Web Design for Tuesday, May 11, 2010

May 11th, 2010 2:02 am by Vincent Flanders

Vincent Flanders’ comments: For some reason, I decided to look at the White House’s home page. The top part of the page looks fine but, as I went down the page, the old bugaboo about contrast popped up. It’s especially problematic because the White House has a link at the bottom of the page that discusses accessibility . Ironically, the link is hard to read because of the lack of contrast.

I ran the page through AccessColor and was told:

Both color difference and color brightness do not meet the recommended standard for 2.88% of the total text.

Either color difference or color brightness does not meet the recommended standard for 20.77% of the total the text.

Text on background with images is for 47.93% of the total text. (Which makes it impossible for them to figure out the contrast levels.)

Here’s a screen capture of the results for those who don’t want to rerun the test.

As far as how well the site performs, I ran the home page through Zoompf and here were the results:

Performance issues with the home page

of whitehouse.gov

Critical High Medium Low
1 14 14 16

Here’s a screenshot of Zoompf’s analysis.

On a more positive note: Whitehouse.gov scored 72 (C) on Yslow and scored an 81 on Page Speed.


Posted in Daily Sucker, Usability, Web Design |

Something that doesn’t suck about a topic that does.

April 27th, 2010 5:05 am by Vincent Flanders

I hate forms. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, WPTS is a form-free zone. However, they’re insanely important for most sites and here’s “Best Practices in Form Design,” a free, downloadable, 133-page PDF (4.37Mb) from the guy who wrote the book on forms.

Download the PDF

Posted in Not a Daily Sucker, Twitter, Usability, Web Design, You Should Read |

GodHatesFags.com is the future of web design

April 20th, 2010 3:03 am by Vincent Flanders

Today, April 20 — which is Hitler’s birthday — seems like a good time to talk about a disturbing trend in web design.

Read the article

Posted in Daily Sucker, Usability, Web Design |

« Previous Entries Next Entries »