Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

The worst of the worst in web design!

SrWebDeveloper

SrWebDeveloper

macrumors 68000
Original poster
Dec 7, 2007
1,871
4
Alexandria, VA, USA
You all have seen the topics posted here where everyone is encouraged to post the BEST iWeb sites, the most professional looking sites, award winning sites, those that make you go "Wow!!!" and so on...

Think about it, we already have a frame of reference for what proper and well designed sites look like. We've discussed web standards, why the exist and how important they are to cross browser compatibility and less headache for the developers and web designers out there trying to make a dollar, or simply for the DIY's working on a personal site in iWeb.

Well, how is a developer or designer to know what NOT to do in a given layout?

:eek:

Yes, folks, I dare to be different.

Read below before replying...

In this topic, if you choose to reply, include a link or snapshot of a web site or page which defies all logic as to common sense design. I'm referring to sites that break all the conventions we're used to talking about here, ones that seem to mock web standards (unintentionally) and great examples of mistakes in execution of concept, functionality and general poor craftsmanship.

Now, let's be clear:

  • I'm NOT looking for typos, obvious mistakes in coding or broken HTML or CSS that doesn't validate. Everyone makes mistakes so alignment is a little off, missing elements, etc.
  • Nor should the CONTENT of the web site be singled out, i.e. something silly, funny or plain old stupid.
But if the content and style doesn't fit so the result is obviously pitiful in terms of execution of the overall concept, then you're on the right track! This isn't about newbie sites, either! It's even better if you find sites that fit the mold of "professional" but clearly miss the mark. The more important the site, the more fun to post it here, too.

How else is a developer to improve their craft unless they can view a few examples of what NOT to do, right? This post is not intended to be purely entertaining, although I hope it will be, but seriously very educational.

PLEASE: When you post, please follow the basic credo above, and be so kind as to explain what caught you eye or what specific principles of web development, design, layout or implementation of standards are (in your opinion) horribly askew! Every link is open to discussion.

Any sites created by anyone you know or is a member of macrumors.com forum is exempt for the obvious reason, i.e. NO personal attacks! Keep your sense of humor but keep focused, too. This topic MIGHT help someone, heh.
So... Who's going to start? ;)

-jim
 
I guess the last time this was done was actually quite a while ago, so what the heck, have at. ;)

I can't think of any really great examples now, so I'll mostly watch. I will say that the Nikeplus website deserves some kind of award for the most unnecessary overuse of Flash known to the internet.
 
A professional company, that totally misses every single useability point possible. It makes you have to work, just to get into the basic site, browsing and navigating the site is terrible. Just finding the "entry" point to the website is unnceessarily hard.
It all seems to be done in flash so what do you expect really? I went to this site to buy a specific pair of shoes, I refused to buy them after seeing this.

The offending site http://clarks.co.uk/

the design company who made it http://un.titled.co.uk/
 
slightly off topic

yetanotherdave said:
A professional company, that totally misses every single useability point possible. It makes you have to work, just to get into the basic site, browsing and navigating the site is terrible. Just finding the "entry" point to the website is unnceessarily hard.
It all seems to be done in flash so what do you expect really? I went to this site to buy a specific pair of shoes, I refused to buy them after seeing this.

The offending site http://clarks.co.uk/

the design company who made it http://un.titled.co.uk/
Click to expand...

I just checked out the designer web site...which looks ok. However you would think that they would get their client list correct. (check out the selected works -> technology -> NTU, it says Nottingham university when it is in fact Nottingham Trent Uni)*

Pretty rubbish. Will not be using them.

* for no UK residents that is like saying "work from Cambridge" when it is in fact Oxford.
 
yetanotherdave said:
A professional company, that totally misses every single useability point possible. It makes you have to work, just to get into the basic site, browsing and navigating the site is terrible. Just finding the "entry" point to the website is unnceessarily hard.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, yetanotherdave, that Clarks one is awful. I remember trying to look for a pair of shoes and also giving up and eventually finding a different pair somewhere else, not even as a matter of principle, just because the other site would let me actually find out about the effing shoes. :p
 
Yeah, there are alot of poorly designed E-Commerce sites in the sense of navigation and overall usability. Thanks for contributing to the thread, I could not agree more!

BTW, nothing wrong with a 100% Flash site so long as basic principles of navigation and layout are included in the design, i.e. a great point was made by yetanotherdave who noted it was impossible to find the entry point. I also want to clarify that 100% use of Flash does not constitute "overuse" by simple definition. Overuse can also occur with most anything if its not properly balance, i.e. a whole site written in JS so anyone with JS disabled sees nothing but a blank white page, Ajax calls for everything so people with JS disabled can't move from page to page or click on a link, too many large or unoptimized graphics so load time takes eons, 14 iframes in one page, etc.

Okay, keep 'em coming! Anyone come across sites with colors that make viewing links and text virtually impossible? Or a corporate site where you can't tell at all what the product is?

-jim
 
It took me a while to remember the websites that are considered "not good enough", because ... well, if they're not good enough, I usually don't try to bookmark them or look into them too much further.

Unless, of course, the contents are of use or the websites really suck that they got stuck in my head for years.


Then suddenly I remembered how most government websites suck, especially those made here (Indonesia). I tried one randomly, which happened to be a website about the capital of Indonesia.

Some of them lead to undefined or forbidden pages. Some of them lead to a page that's somehow unrelated. But what puzzled me was the decision to make some links as pop-up to new _blank page, while some were made as regular, non pop-up links. Oh yah, the index page has different look and feel compared to the other pages, too.

Then there's some javascript source code scattered in the source code. If you take a look at them, the codes are just basic codes that can be put anywhere, either within <head></head> section, or external script. Not sure if this is counted as obvious mistake in coding, though.


-stndn.


Edit:
Just to add to the reasons why this site sucks, if you change the language for the site, you will:
1. Get sent back to the index page instead of current page
2. Get different list of "latest" information (eg: Indonesian version = News from 2008, English version = News from 2005)
 
iTeen said:
www.myspace.com
;)
Click to expand...

I was going to add myspace (fixed the link for you) as well, but I guess that's a common knowledge already :p

Jokes aside, here's something else I found a while back: http://www.izzipizza.com/.
Warning: Make sure you enable flashblock, as the navigation make use of lots of flash, as in: Each navigation link (on top) is actually an individual flash file. I've had SeaMonkey crashed on my MacBook when I first opened the site long ago, which was terrible.

That site is either an example of flash overuse, or an example of site made by beginner flash coder/user/scripter/etc. Or both.


-stndn.
 
stndn said:
Then there's some javascript source code scattered in the source code. If you take a look at them, the codes are just basic codes that can be put anywhere, either within <head></head> section, or external script. Not sure if this is counted as obvious mistake in coding, though.
Click to expand...

The site in question was awful, thanks for posting!

Just wanted to comment GENERALLY (not about that site) that some web sites use content management systems where within an article inside a given bucket, well or section often JS code can be inserted by the content provider specific to that article. This means the JS code for that article might display in the source flow, not in the headers where it belongs, it's all one record in a DB sometimes.

Obviously this means many third party CMT's are poorly designed in terms of separating JS and CSS from content, not necessarily the fault of the content provider. FYI, if you view source and see things like that.

Excellent replies so far, such fun this is (and soooo educational!)

-jim
 
What company do you work for?

rdowns said:
One of my sales reps asked me to get on the phone with a customer who said he was considering this company.

http://warranties4wheels.com/

I just said (to the customer), are you serious?
Click to expand...

What company do you work for that you would say something like to that a potential customer? Seems not very smart on your part.
Did you check them out before you made such a flippant comment like that to a consumer?
 
I live in New Haven CT and vote their city website as one of the worst I have ever used. Not only is it terribly ugly, but there is very little valuable information on the site and what is there is difficult to find. http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/

I should add though, that it is a great city to live in!
 
Agree, agree, agree, agree ... These sites are all crazily busy and difficult to get a grip on - I particularly like the one that gives advice on how not to suck but sucks itself (ooops that sounds rude, sorry!)

Now here's one with too few visual stimuli for a change: http://www.c-s-p.org/

And here's one that is for a web consultancy firm: http://www.cxpartners.co.uk/

I have actually seen one of the guys from CX Partners speak and here was mightily impressive but unfortunately for me their website does not practice what he preached - mores the pity.
 
Before reading a single reply here... worst thing in web design... INTERNET EXPLORER --- every single version of it.

Anything I design works PERFECT in every version of Firefox, Safari, Opera and every single other browser out there. EVERYTHING is ALWAYS broken in IE!!! :mad: Always have to spend hours trying to figure out why its broken again and again
 
DAC47 said:
all i want to know is, what time does the bus go?
IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK

one of the worst sites i know
http://www.cardiffbus.com/
Click to expand...

I bet you win the competition with that one...

Services=>(Blank page, uh? oh! the right sided menu changed!)=>Timetables (So what? Why not put the Timetables here?)=>View Timetable (of course... I previously clicked on Timetables but that doesn't mean that I want to see them, right?)=>Day... let's select Monday to Friday (Why don't you let me select the Route now?)=> get redirected to an ugly page
http://www.cardiffbus.com/services/timetables/TIMES/MF/

Website design like it was in the mid-90s... Should be a crime... :confused:
 
I've seen pretty bad sites; I recall seeing one recently, where everything was all over the place; the site was too wide and too long. It was like 10MB HTML homepage. I was like WTF.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back