Why do web site developers insist on ruining functionality with whiz-bang?

[Boomhauer]

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.

[GigaBuist]

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.

[Brad Johnson]

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. 

Brad

[Brad Johnson]

Quick update....

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

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

[lee n. field]

bUD uGLLY dESIGN . pROFESSIONAL wEB dEVELOPMENT

Revel in the awfulness.

[Nick1911]

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?



Answer: Plenty of them.

[Marnoot]

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.

[MechAg94]

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.

[KD5NRH]

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.

[230RN]

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>

[Hawkmoon]

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.

[Firethorn]

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...

[KD5NRH]

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.

[never_retreat]

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?

[230RN]

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

[Hawkmoon]

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.

[Brad Johnson]

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

[KD5NRH]

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.

[Boomhauer]

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.

[MechAg94]

bUD uGLLY dESIGN . pROFESSIONAL wEB dEVELOPMENT

Revel in the awfulness.

Seeing the links change size and font when you put the cursor over them gives me horrific shivers. 

[Brad Johnson]

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... 

Brad

[GigaBuist]

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... 

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.

[Brad Johnson]

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

[Boomhauer]

The news sites are worse than clickbait sites

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Scout26]

The news sites are worse than clickbait sites

FTFY....