Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Brad Johnson on January 04, 2015, 01:41:39 PM

Title: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 04, 2015, 01:41:39 PM
CNN just changed their mobile web format to the hideous "new-thing" scrolling-boxes-within-scrolling-boxes layout. It's awful. Not only is overall functionality crap, it is so script-bloated that it takes almost 20 seconds to fully load on my phone. Even when loaded it doesn't work properly, locking up randomly for extended periods. It also doesn't play nice with my phone's browser when trying to use forms. I couldn't submit feedback with their form until I installed a different browser app.

I've noticed several places.doing the same. Springfield Armory's page is a big offender. Automaker's mobile pages, namely Ford, are so bloated they are virtually unusable.

I've also discovered that I dislike Chrome's mobile browser app. In it's attempt to streamline the app it's so bare bones that everyday ease-of-use suffers noticeably vs my Galaxy's native browser.

*rant off*

Brad
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: zahc on January 04, 2015, 01:48:59 PM
Nsfw, but relevant

http://tinyurl.com/n7etzst
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Boomhauer on January 04, 2015, 01:50:47 PM
Hell yes it's gotten stupid beyond belief

The news sites in particular tend to be hideous, and not just from the whiz-bang, the ads and scripts have gotten insane (I have to use a script blocker just to be able to access the sites without it jamming up my machine).

And I'm tired of seeing crap like this on the news websites. Stupid ads for stupid *expletive deleted*it...

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi60.tinypic.com%2Fk18ltx.png&hash=e115a846ba3d20c296d55e81c7b963d99224c4cf)

Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 04, 2015, 02:12:15 PM
Nsfw, but relevant

http://tinyurl.com/n7etzst


"Cross-browser compatibility? Load this mother****er in IE6. I ****ing dare you."

Awsomeness is awesome. :laugh:

Brad
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 04, 2015, 02:37:05 PM
Hell yes it's gotten stupid beyond belief

The news sites in particular tend to be hideous, and not just from the whiz-bang, the ads and scripts have gotten insane

That, plus half the articles are not articles at all, but videos. Compared to text, video is horribly inefficient at actually delivering the 5 W's of journalism.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Boomhauer on January 04, 2015, 02:38:47 PM
That, plus half the articles are not articles at all, but videos. Compared to text, video is horribly inefficient at actually delivering the 5 W's of journalism.


I. Hate. News. Videos.

I read FAR faster than a video's speed, so I would rather have an article to read vs. a video to watch.

Not that they care about actual journalism in the least, of course.

Title: Re: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: roo_ster on January 04, 2015, 02:47:06 PM
Nsfw, but relevant

http://tinyurl.com/n7etzst
So many website developers need to read that.
Title: Re: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 04, 2015, 02:50:27 PM
So many website developers need to read that.

If they know how to read.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: 230RN on January 04, 2015, 03:15:20 PM
Jeeze, it loaded so fast I thought it was cached on my machine.

No hangfires.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Perd Hapley on January 04, 2015, 03:35:33 PM
Springfield Armory's page is a big offender.
Brad



I just spent several minutes on their web page, and I'd have to say it's actually a lot better than it used to be. Not that that's saying much, and it may have more to do with having a much faster connection than I used to have...
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Firethorn on January 04, 2015, 04:29:14 PM
I read FAR faster than a video's speed, so I would rather have an article to read vs. a video to watch.

I'm the same way.  I hate it when I click on a news link only to find that the only way to get the content is to watch the bleeping video.  Complete with ads(the point), station intro, etc...

BTW, I wonder if it'd be possible to sue a site if it consistently displayed ads but wouldn't display the content?  'Your honor, I paid for the content by watching their ads, multiple times, but was never served the actual content.  This is deceptive advertising and violation of contract(or something)'.  

Another recent pet peeve when I happened to have to do some browsing without ad&script blocking:  One news site had FIVE videos all set to autoplay AT THE SAME TIME.  Three of them were identical, but for some reason they loaded at different times, so I had an echo effect going.

The site was very usable with the adblocker up though.

I'm like, WTF, are you guys TRYING to drive us to use ad-block?
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: never_retreat on January 04, 2015, 04:41:17 PM
Theres and add on for Firefox called disconnect. Give it a try. Works good for a local papers site that virtually would never finish loading.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: 230RN on January 04, 2015, 05:31:32 PM
'Nother thing that bothers me is low contrast between the text and the background.  Brown text on tan ground is pretty bad on one of the gun sites...also had that cowboy/westen font, I forget what they call it.  

Sometimes I have to "Select All" and copy it to Notepad to read it.

Worst I've seen is red text on blue background.

Click.  
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Boomhauer on January 04, 2015, 05:42:01 PM
'Nother thing that bothers me is low contrast between the text and the background.  Brown text on tan ground is pretty bad on one of the gun sites...also had that cowboy/westen font, I forget what they call it. 

Sometimes I have to "Select All" and copy it to Notepad to read it.

Worst I've seen is red text on blue background.

Click. 

This too. Some of the forums out there are nigh unreadable to me because of the background colors.

APS is pretty pleasing to me and I can read it without eye fatigue. Same for THR (back when it was worth reading...)
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 04, 2015, 06:03:58 PM
Used to be a local.website with dark red letters on a dark blue background. It was terrible. Contrast was awful and the wavelength differences made the letters fuzzy.

Brad
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: 230RN on January 04, 2015, 06:32:38 PM
^"Contrast was awful and the wavelength differences made the letters fuzzy."

Exactly !  Hence the click.

The internet is a communications medium.  So communicate, darn it !  

Don't play artsyfartsy games with it just to show off how creative you can be.


Like that right there.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: never_retreat on January 04, 2015, 09:09:04 PM
Something along the lines of projectile vomit html code.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: just Warren on January 04, 2015, 10:04:14 PM
I've noticed a lot of this as well but I don't know how the sites should be set up for maximal user value.

Where is the line drawn?

Another issue is making me watch a 60+ second commercial  for a 20-30 second highlight. And then making me watch that same commercial every time I click on a new video. I'm looking at you NFL.com. Plus having to watch the same long site logo introduction before each video, just give me a portal where I can watch the videos one after another without all that. I'll watch the site logo intro and commercial up front and if you want to drop a different commercial in every now and again I don't mind.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Cliffh on January 04, 2015, 10:45:48 PM
Even the site I use to check on work stuff (schedule, etc.) is loaded down with videos, pictures, scrolling banners, etc.  It is a major retail store, but come on, I'm not buying *expletive deleted*it, I'm just trying to check my damn work schedule!
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 05, 2015, 01:15:04 AM
Quote
   
Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?

Short answer: Because they can.

Developers seem to think they aren't doing their job if they don't include every new toy that's available in a web page or site. They forget that probably 90 percent of the people who will actually be looking at those pages probably don't have the latest, greatest super computer in the universe with which to execute all the garbage they toss in. It's been one of my pet peeves for years.

And another is changing the design of a site just for the sake of changing it. CNN changed their site for regular viewers, too, not just for mobile devices. It's difficult to find anything, and they eliminated the "Justice" story area entirely.

And then there are the program developers. Firefox recently changed their whole user interface. The new one, IMHO, is horrible to the point of being unusable. Installing the new version over an existing version does NOT remember your customization (such as where tabs are located, and which buttons or icons you've added to the basic menu bar). To top it off, in order to keep any semblance of the Firefox you're accustomed to using, you can't just click an icon or menu choice and revert to "Classic Theme." Oh, no -- you have to download and install an unsupported add-on.

I think all web and program developers should be required to work on computers that are not less than five years old, and all new programs and applications should likewise be beta tested on such "legacy" machines.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 05, 2015, 09:28:13 AM
That, plus half the articles are not articles at all, but videos. Compared to text, video is horribly inefficient at actually delivering the 5 W's of journalism.

And most "articles" that accompany videos are nothing but a transcription of the video, adding no new or additional information whatsoever.

Journalism is dead..
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: KD5NRH on January 05, 2015, 01:28:20 PM
Another issue is making me watch a 60+ second commercial  for a 20-30 second highlight. And then making me watch that same commercial every time I click on a new video.

Back when I actually bothered with Hulu, I wrote to several of their advertisers pointing out that the same ad 3-4 times in a 30 minute show had very much the opposite effect; even if I might have sort of wanted the product, I was more likely to go look for a competitor that hadn't pissed me off at that point.  IMO, they would have done a lot better to buy all the spots for that show, but only run one ad once, or at least just one full length and a couple of 5-10 second teasers.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: zxcvbob on January 05, 2015, 02:08:14 PM
How about a page with multiple video windows (some of them content and some of them ads) and they all autoplay at the same time?  And some are off the screen even at high resolution, so you have to scroll down to turn them off, but you can't really scroll because the browser is overwhelmed. 

Adblocker helps tremendously with that.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Firethorn on January 05, 2015, 02:15:29 PM
How about a page with multiple video windows (some of them content and some of them ads) and they all autoplay at the same time?  And some are off the screen even at high resolution, so you have to scroll down to turn them off, but you can't really scroll because the browser is overwhelmed. 

Adblocker helps tremendously with that.

You must of hit the same news site I did.  Five autoplay videos, 3 of them copies of the same content(having to do with the article I was after), and 2 others.  There were even more videos loaded, but at least they weren't set to autoplay.

And yes, on my 1920x1200 monitor, ALL of them were off the screen.  I had to scroll all over the place to find them.  It was like playing whack-a-mole.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: MechAg94 on January 05, 2015, 04:49:57 PM
Back when I actually bothered with Hulu, I wrote to several of their advertisers pointing out that the same ad 3-4 times in a 30 minute show had very much the opposite effect; even if I might have sort of wanted the product, I was more likely to go look for a competitor that hadn't pissed me off at that point.  IMO, they would have done a lot better to buy all the spots for that show, but only run one ad once, or at least just one full length and a couple of 5-10 second teasers.
IMO, this same thing applies to radio and TV ads.  A commercial that might be sorta clever and almost funny the first time becomes a reason to change the channel/station after the 132nd time.  I used to get really pissed at some of the radio ads a few years back when I had a long commute.  (see radio ads where two people are having a conversation or TV ads which are the 13th interation of a successful ad campaign)
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Boomhauer on January 05, 2015, 05:24:52 PM
Back when I actually bothered with Hulu, I wrote to several of their advertisers pointing out that the same ad 3-4 times in a 30 minute show had very much the opposite effect; even if I might have sort of wanted the product, I was more likely to go look for a competitor that hadn't pissed me off at that point.  IMO, they would have done a lot better to buy all the spots for that show, but only run one ad once, or at least just one full length and a couple of 5-10 second teasers.

I don't watch the hulu ads, I just pull up another browser window and come here to *expletive deleted*ck with ya'll.

Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: GigaBuist on January 06, 2015, 08:58:44 PM
Back when I actually bothered with Hulu, I wrote to several of their advertisers pointing out that the same ad 3-4 times in a 30 minute show had very much the opposite effect; even if I might have sort of wanted the product, I was more likely to go look for a competitor that hadn't pissed me off at that point.  IMO, they would have done a lot better to buy all the spots for that show, but only run one ad once, or at least just one full length and a couple of 5-10 second teasers.

You can't entirely blame the advertiser for that.  Unlike air or cable TV ads you don't buy time with Hulu by the "show" you buy it by the demographic.  So, it's no "I want 16 commercials for the 8pm showing of Modern Family" it's "I'll give you enough money to give me 400,000 impressions on females from 35-85" and Hulu just sticks them in front of people as needed to get their impression count.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 06, 2015, 09:58:25 PM
You can't entirely blame the advertiser for that.  Unlike air or cable TV ads you don't buy time with Hulu by the "show" you buy it by the demographic.  So, it's no "I want 16 commercials for the 8pm showing of Modern Family" it's "I'll give you enough money to give me 400,000 impressions on females from 35-85" and Hulu just sticks them in front of people as needed to get their impression count.


I wouldn't mind a few "impressions on females". 35-85 is a bit of a spread, though. Make it 35-50 and I might be interested.  :angel:

Brad
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 12, 2015, 11:25:15 AM
Quick update....

Loathing for the web site redesign was so universal that CNN closed comments on the new site rollout story.  :rofl:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/03/tech/new-cnn-website-artley/index.html

Takes a while to load comments but they will. Eventually.

Brad

Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: lee n. field on January 12, 2015, 11:40:46 AM
bUD uGLLY dESIGN . pROFESSIONAL wEB dEVELOPMENT (http://budugllydesign.com/)

Revel in the awfulness.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Nick1911 on January 12, 2015, 11:46:17 AM
I will note that a lot of this is driven by ahole marketing and sales weenies.  They think that all this crap is what the customer wants.  And, they're right.  Most the customer base does want the shiny.  It sells.

Example:

Question: What kind of moron would click on the following?

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi62.tinypic.com%2F2yl4m7s.png&hash=936e66b39d92d2d43d38e460740d6b9b015bf114)

Answer: Plenty of them.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Marnoot on January 12, 2015, 02:27:22 PM
I just want to say as a developer, that the developers may not necessarily be to blame. Most horribleness that has gone into the product I work on was mandated by Business, and I had no choice. Always feel dirty writing code for "features" I know the users will hate . . . But some VP made a throwaway comment about "it'd be nice if it did X when you did Y," so Business insists it be done even though it's a terrible idea.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: MechAg94 on January 12, 2015, 02:44:13 PM
Most of those link ads at the bottom look like they are linking to stores on the news site, not some external worthless ad sites with short useless "stories".  The funny ones are the list articles they link to that are purposefully bad.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: KD5NRH on January 12, 2015, 02:52:47 PM
I just want to say as a developer, that the developers may not necessarily be to blame. Most horribleness that has gone into the product I work on was mandated by Business, and I had no choice. Always feel dirty writing code for "features" I know the users will hate . . . But some VP made a throwaway comment about "it'd be nice if it did X when you did Y," so Business insists it be done even though it's a terrible idea.

Would be better if it was made modular, with only the features the user wants to install and/or enable.  Then the marketing twits can be happy, and so can the user that doesn't have a Galaxy-class starship's computer to run their word processor on.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: 230RN on January 17, 2015, 10:23:18 PM
Here's one for you.  Was watching "Star  Trek" Episode "Arena*" and heard several references to distances in yards.  Yeah, like in stardate whatever-it-was.

So I wondered what kind of comments there were on the 'net about that, searched for <STAR TREK +ARENA + YARDS>.

One of the first sites that came up was:

http://www.thebigcity.com/StarTrek/1st_season/Arena.html

Read it and weep --from eyestrain tears. :)

Terry

* <purposeless snark unrelated to web developers>

That was the one where Kirk concocted some BP and made a cannon, all from  found materials, and blew the crap out of the Gorn.  After, mind  you, smooshing the Gorn with about a two-ton (~1814.882032667876588021778584392 kg) boulder which the Gorn recovered from.  Say, who ya going to believe, me, or your lyin' eyes?

</purposeless snark unrelated to web developers>
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 18, 2015, 01:00:18 AM
I just want to say as a developer, that the developers may not necessarily be to blame. Most horribleness that has gone into the product I work on was mandated by Business, and I had no choice. Always feel dirty writing code for "features" I know the users will hate . . . But some VP made a throwaway comment about "it'd be nice if it did X when you did Y," so Business insists it be done even though it's a terrible idea.

I have two pet peeves about web design in general. First, ALL web site designers should be required to read up on red-green color vision deficiency. I have it. A very large percentage of the white male population has it. Red text on a dark blue background is painful to the eyes but at least you know there's something there. Red on black is, for me, invisible. Literally. I've encountered web sites that open up with a black background and red text. I can't even find where it says "Click here to enter our site." What's the point of designing a site that a major percentage of your viewers can't see?

And that "Click here to enter" brings me to the other pet peeve. WHY should I have to "Click here to enter"? I just typed the URL to your web site into my browser because I wanted to enter your web site. Why do I now have to click another screen just to get me where your URL should have taken me in the first place. I've seen sites that take as many as four click-throughs to finally get to the content page you came to the site to view. That's just plain DUMB.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Firethorn on January 18, 2015, 01:59:31 PM
That's just plain DUMB.

It's generally a lawyer thing, though I've seen where it's that they're trying to show you advertising before you reach the site.  If like any sane person you're running an ad-blocker...
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: KD5NRH on January 18, 2015, 04:22:19 PM
Here's one for you.  Was watching "Star  Trek" Episode "Arena*" and heard several references to distances in yards.  Yeah, like in stardate whatever-it-was.

They use feet from time to time, too, and I've heard some miles slip in there too.  I've always just been really impressed with the universality of hours; race they've never encountered before always uses nice even numbers of hours for the meeting or deadline or whatever.  I could see the universal translator doing unit conversions too, but it's amazing how they're always to such nice round numbers of hours; never one hour, twenty three minutes and nine seconds to account for whatever their planet's rotational period is.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: never_retreat on January 18, 2015, 05:08:09 PM
I have two pet peeves about web design in general. First, ALL web site designers should be required to read up on red-green color vision deficiency. I have it. A very large percentage of the white male population has it. Red text on a dark blue background is painful to the eyes but at least you know there's something there. Red on black is, for me, invisible. Literally. I've encountered web sites that open up with a black background and red text. I can't even find where it says "Click here to enter our site." What's the point of designing a site that a major percentage of your viewers can't see?

And that "Click here to enter" brings me to the other pet peeve. WHY should I have to "Click here to enter"? I just typed the URL to your web site into my browser because I wanted to enter your web site. Why do I now have to click another screen just to get me where your URL should have taken me in the first place. I've seen sites that take as many as four click-throughs to finally get to the content page you came to the site to view. That's just plain DUMB.
Does it also say you must be 18 years old?
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: 230RN on January 18, 2015, 06:43:45 PM
Quote
I could see the universal translator doing unit conversions too, but it's amazing how they're always to such nice round numbers of hours; never one hour, twenty three minutes and nine seconds to account for whatever their planet's rotational period is.

Well, they never use "Warp Factor 5.7935," either.

Maybe they're using integer arithmetic on 8088 processors.

I'm reminded of the Star Trekkin' parody song:  "Star Trekkin' across the universe.  Always going forward 'cause we can't find reverse."

Terry
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Hawkmoon on January 18, 2015, 07:28:48 PM
Does it also say you must be 18 years old?

Nope. I don't do those kinds of sites. I'm talking about Springfield Armory, Nighthawk Customs (another 1911 maker) and any number of other gun manufacturers' sites.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Brad Johnson on January 23, 2015, 01:25:50 AM
https://m.facebook.com/cnn/posts/10153215563986509

CNN's Facebook announcement for the new mobile design is being thoroughly panned. Seems the loathing is nigh universal.

Brad
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: KD5NRH on January 23, 2015, 09:46:03 AM
CNN's Facebook announcement for the new mobile design is being throughly panned. Seems the loathing is nigh universal.

Which means they will also be implementing elements of MS Bob to make up for it.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Boomhauer on January 23, 2015, 11:43:11 AM
https://m.facebook.com/cnn/posts/10153215563986509

CNN's Facebook announcement for the new mobile design is being thoroughly panned. Seems the loathing is nigh universal.

Brad

I count 34 scripts running on the page (if not more). It's nigh unusuable, nearly freezes my computer up.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: MechAg94 on January 23, 2015, 02:43:55 PM
bUD uGLLY dESIGN . pROFESSIONAL wEB dEVELOPMENT (http://budugllydesign.com/)

Revel in the awfulness.
Seeing the links change size and font when you put the cursor over them gives me horrific shivers. 
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Brad Johnson on February 04, 2015, 05:59:40 PM
Reviving the thread because whiz-bang-web-site is hitting a little closer to home tomorrow.

My civic club is considering a revised web site. A member's son fancies himself a site developer. Aside from the insanely high cost he's quoting for "administration" (which is mostly social media plugins and a bunch of useless site gadgets we'll never use) he gave us this gem as an example of his prowess.

http://www.charitywater.org/

It's awful. Tomorrow it's being presented to the Board of Directors. I can't wait...  >:D

Brad
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: GigaBuist on February 04, 2015, 09:06:14 PM
Reviving the thread because whiz-bang-web-site is hitting a little closer to home tomorrow.

My civic club is considering a revised web site. A member's son fancies himself a site developer. Aside from the insanely high cost he's quoting for "administration" (which is mostly social media plugins and a bunch of useless site gadgets we'll never use) he gave us this gem as an example of his prowess.

http://www.charitywater.org/

It's awful. Tomorrow it's being presented to the Board of Directors. I can't wait...  >:D

Brad

It's a little active for an opening page, so you sorta shun low powered desktops there.  But it does work, and it navigates well. It also degrades well into a text only browser which I've always found is a good test for usability.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Brad Johnson on September 22, 2017, 11:43:54 AM
Thread necro because I notice Fox News has climbed on the bandwagon. BIG FRIGGIN" PICS WITH HUGE HEADLINES followed by a couple reams of ad lines, then more BIG HEADLINES. The old site was at least scrollable. The new site is so bloated with auto-populating ad boxes that it never really finishes loading on my mobile browser. I also notice they added some nice popups with the time-delayed window kill Xs.  :rolleyes:

Brad
Title: Re:
Post by: Boomhauer on September 22, 2017, 02:28:55 PM
The news sites are worse than clickbait sites

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Title: Re:
Post by: Scout26 on September 22, 2017, 02:41:32 PM
The news sites are worse than clickbait sites


FTFY....
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 22, 2017, 03:48:33 PM
Reviving the thread because whiz-bang-web-site is hitting a little closer to home tomorrow.

My civic club is considering a revised web site. A member's son fancies himself a site developer. Aside from the insanely high cost he's quoting for "administration" (which is mostly social media plugins and a bunch of useless site gadgets we'll never use) he gave us this gem as an example of his prowess.

http://www.charitywater.org/

It's awful. Tomorrow it's being presented to the Board of Directors. I can't wait...  >:D

Brad

It took over a minute for that link to load. More than half of that I was staring at a blank screen. Not encouraging.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: RevDisk on September 22, 2017, 04:39:57 PM
Quote
Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?

Because they can. And will.
Title: Re: Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?
Post by: just Warren on September 22, 2017, 11:40:50 PM
This might not be directly on topic but what's the deal with a page loading like 5-6 or more times so that when you hit the back button it doesn't take you back to the page you want but rather the page you are trying to leave.

Really frustrating.