Interesting list

Discussion in 'HTML' started by El Kabong, Jun 13, 2007.

  1. El Kabong

    El Kabong Guest

    A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.

    1. Pop Ups
    2. Extra Software Needed to View Site
    3. Dead Links
    4. Registration Required
    5. Slow Pages
    6. Out of date Content
    7. Bad Navigation
    8. No Contact Information
    9. No Decent Site Search Tool
    10. Disabled "Back" Button

    His site is worth a visit IMO because he does include some discussion
    regarding each item which I did not include here. According to Mr. Lamm, the
    list was based on "many surveys". It certainly includes several of my
    greatest peeves (1, 2, 4, & 10)

    Did he leave any out?

    El
     
    El Kabong, Jun 13, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. On 2007-06-13, El Kabong wrote:
    > A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    > of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >
    > 1. Pop Ups
    > 2. Extra Software Needed to View Site
    > 3. Dead Links
    > 4. Registration Required
    > 5. Slow Pages
    > 6. Out of date Content
    > 7. Bad Navigation
    > 8. No Contact Information
    > 9. No Decent Site Search Tool
    > 10. Disabled "Back" Button
    >
    > His site is worth a visit IMO because he does include some discussion
    > regarding each item which I did not include here. According to Mr. Lamm, the
    > list was based on "many surveys". It certainly includes several of my
    > greatest peeves (1, 2, 4, & 10)
    >
    > Did he leave any out?


    Links that turn the same colour as the background on hover -- like
    the "File under" links on the site mentioned above.

    Pages that do not adjust to the viewer's browser window -- like
    the site mentioned above.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Jun 13, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. El Kabong wrote:
    > A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    > of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >
    > 1. Pop Ups
    > 2. Extra Software Needed to View Site
    > 3. Dead Links
    > 4. Registration Required
    > 5. Slow Pages
    > 6. Out of date Content
    > 7. Bad Navigation
    > 8. No Contact Information
    > 9. No Decent Site Search Tool
    > 10. Disabled "Back" Button
    >
    > His site is worth a visit IMO because he does include some discussion
    > regarding each item which I did not include here. According to Mr. Lamm, the
    > list was based on "many surveys". It certainly includes several of my
    > greatest peeves (1, 2, 4, & 10)
    >
    > Did he leave any out?


    Embedded music.


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Jun 13, 2007
    #3
  4. Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

    > On 2007-06-13, El Kabong wrote:
    >> A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    >> of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >>
    >> 1. Pop Ups
    >> 2. Extra Software Needed to View Site
    >> 3. Dead Links
    >> 4. Registration Required
    >> 5. Slow Pages
    >> 6. Out of date Content
    >> 7. Bad Navigation
    >> 8. No Contact Information
    >> 9. No Decent Site Search Tool
    >> 10. Disabled "Back" Button
    >>
    >> His site is worth a visit IMO because he does include some discussion
    >> regarding each item which I did not include here. According to Mr. Lamm, the
    >> list was based on "many surveys". It certainly includes several of my
    >> greatest peeves (1, 2, 4, & 10)
    >>
    >> Did he leave any out?

    >
    > 11. Links that turn the same colour as the background on hover -- like
    > the "File under" links on the site mentioned above.
    >
    > 12. Pages that do not adjust to the viewer's browser window -- like
    > the site mentioned above.


    13. Reading a loooong page of microfonts -- like the site mentioned
    above.

    14. Going to a page that takes a minute to load, on a fast cable
    connection (probably his server) -- like the site mentioned above.

    15. Using blue text -- like ... yeah, you get it.

    16. http://validator.w3.org/ = Failed validation, 34 errors ... oh wait,
    we weren't talking about technical flaws, were we?

    --
    -bts
    -Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck
     
    Beauregard T. Shagnasty, Jun 13, 2007
    #4
  5. On 2007-06-13, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > On 2007-06-13, El Kabong wrote:
    >> A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    >> of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >>
    >> 1. Pop Ups
    >> 2. Extra Software Needed to View Site
    >> 3. Dead Links
    >> 4. Registration Required
    >> 5. Slow Pages
    >> 6. Out of date Content
    >> 7. Bad Navigation
    >> 8. No Contact Information
    >> 9. No Decent Site Search Tool
    >> 10. Disabled "Back" Button
    >>
    >> His site is worth a visit IMO because he does include some discussion
    >> regarding each item which I did not include here. According to Mr. Lamm, the
    >> list was based on "many surveys". It certainly includes several of my
    >> greatest peeves (1, 2, 4, & 10)
    >>
    >> Did he leave any out?

    >
    > Links that turn the same colour as the background on hover -- like
    > the "File under" links on the site mentioned above.
    >
    > Pages that do not adjust to the viewer's browser window -- like
    > the site mentioned above.


    Sites that set the default text size to .62em (like the
    above-mentioned site).

    Sites that end lines with <br> (or <br /> in this case)
    breaking lines awkwardly (like the above-mentioned site):

    - You have permission to publish this article electronically
    in
    free-only publications such as a website or an ezine as long
    as
    the bylines are included.


    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Jun 13, 2007
    #5
  6. El Kabong

    Guest

    On Wed, 13 Jun 2007 00:42:53 -0400, "Chris F.A. Johnson"
    <> wrote:

    >On 2007-06-13, El Kabong wrote:
    >> A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    >> of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >>
    >> 1. Pop Ups
    >> 2. Extra Software Needed to View Site
    >> 3. Dead Links
    >> 4. Registration Required
    >> 5. Slow Pages
    >> 6. Out of date Content
    >> 7. Bad Navigation
    >> 8. No Contact Information
    >> 9. No Decent Site Search Tool
    >> 10. Disabled "Back" Button
    >>
    >> His site is worth a visit IMO because he does include some discussion
    >> regarding each item which I did not include here. According to Mr. Lamm, the
    >> list was based on "many surveys". It certainly includes several of my
    >> greatest peeves (1, 2, 4, & 10)
    >>
    >> Did he leave any out?

    >
    > Links that turn the same colour as the background on hover -- like
    > the "File under" links on the site mentioned above.
    >
    > Pages that do not adjust to the viewer's browser window -- like
    > the site mentioned above.


    Tell me how would this site (above link) look on widescreen ? :)
     
    , Jun 13, 2007
    #6
  7. El Kabong

    Bergamot Guest

    Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > On 2007-06-13, El Kabong wrote:
    >> A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    >> of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >>
    >> Did he leave any out?


    11. Failure to use even basic typography or correct semantics, resulting
    in a big blob of text on screen, like on the site mentioned above. It is
    so tedious to read, I can't get past the first couple paragraphs.

    BTW, does this guy say anything that Jakob Nielsen hasn't been saying
    for about 10 years?

    > Pages that do not adjust to the viewer's browser window -- like
    > the site mentioned above.


    It's a canned blog template, so that's not really surprising.

    --
    Berg
     
    Bergamot, Jun 13, 2007
    #7
  8. El Kabong

    JD Guest

    El Kabong wrote:
    > A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    > of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >
    > 1. Pop Ups
    > 2. Extra Software Needed to View Site
    > 3. Dead Links
    > 4. Registration Required
    > 5. Slow Pages
    > 6. Out of date Content
    > 7. Bad Navigation
    > 8. No Contact Information
    > 9. No Decent Site Search Tool
    > 10. Disabled "Back" Button
    >
    > His site is worth a visit IMO because he does include some discussion
    > regarding each item which I did not include here. According to Mr. Lamm, the
    > list was based on "many surveys". It certainly includes several of my
    > greatest peeves (1, 2, 4, & 10)
    >
    > Did he leave any out?


    One of my pet peeves is "enlarge image" links that go to images that are
    barely any bigger than the original thumbnail.
     
    JD, Jun 13, 2007
    #8
  9. On 2007-06-13, Bergamot wrote:
    > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    >> On 2007-06-13, El Kabong wrote:
    >>> A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    >>> of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >>>
    >>> Did he leave any out?

    >
    > 11. Failure to use even basic typography or correct semantics, resulting
    > in a big blob of text on screen, like on the site mentioned above. It is
    > so tedious to read, I can't get past the first couple paragraphs.
    >
    > BTW, does this guy say anything that Jakob Nielsen hasn't been saying
    > for about 10 years?
    >
    >> Pages that do not adjust to the viewer's browser window -- like
    >> the site mentioned above.

    >
    > It's a canned blog template, so that's not really surprising.


    True, but changing (or removing) two or three lines in the CSS file
    fixes it.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Jun 13, 2007
    #9
  10. El Kabong

    El Kabong Guest

    "Bergamot" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    >> On 2007-06-13, El Kabong wrote:
    >>> A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a
    >>> list
    >>> of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >>>
    >>> Did he leave any out?

    >
    > 11. Failure to use even basic typography or correct semantics, resulting
    > in a big blob of text on screen, like on the site mentioned above. It is
    > so tedious to read, I can't get past the first couple paragraphs.
    >
    > BTW, does this guy say anything that Jakob Nielsen hasn't been saying
    > for about 10 years?
    >
    >> Pages that do not adjust to the viewer's browser window -- like
    >> the site mentioned above.

    >
    > It's a canned blog template, so that's not really surprising.


    Perhaps I should have been more critical of his presentation but I was only
    interested in his content at the time. He is a retired lawyer, not a
    professional Web designer as far as I know, much less a design guru.

    If his design was lacking, his points were well made as were those made by
    all who responded to my post.

    Thanks for the responses... and the critical advice.

    El
     
    El Kabong, Jun 14, 2007
    #10
  11. JD wrote:
    > El Kabong wrote:
    >> A Web site (http://www.virtualjoefriday.com) by Charles Lamm includes a list
    >> of the top ten ways to irritate your Web site's visitors.
    >>
    >> 1. Pop Ups
    >> 2. Extra Software Needed to View Site
    >> 3. Dead Links
    >> 4. Registration Required
    >> 5. Slow Pages
    >> 6. Out of date Content
    >> 7. Bad Navigation
    >> 8. No Contact Information
    >> 9. No Decent Site Search Tool
    >> 10. Disabled "Back" Button
    >>
    >> His site is worth a visit IMO because he does include some discussion
    >> regarding each item which I did not include here. According to Mr. Lamm, the
    >> list was based on "many surveys". It certainly includes several of my
    >> greatest peeves (1, 2, 4, & 10)
    >>
    >> Did he leave any out?

    >
    > One of my pet peeves is "enlarge image" links that go to images that are
    > barely any bigger than the original thumbnail.


    And large images that are downsized via height and width attributes so
    you're still downloading 238kb for a small version, thus saving no
    bandwidth (read "time") at all.


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Jun 14, 2007
    #11
  12. El Kabong

    freemont Guest

    On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 01:29:51 +0000, Blinky the Shark writ:

    > And large images that are downsized via height and width attributes so
    > you're still downloading 238kb for a small version, thus saving no
    > bandwidth (read "time") at all.


    I've one of the best examples of this EVER.

    <http://www.hcbe.net/facilities/splost2012/mossy.html>

    I emailed the guy May 4th but never heard back. It's even worse now that
    he's added more pictures to the page. When I looked then, there was only
    the one 8.4MB pic, shrunk down to 238 x 157 with html. Now the page is
    closer to 15MB.

    --
    "Because all you of Earth are idiots!"
    ¯`·..·¯`·-> freemont© <-·¯`·..·¯
     
    freemont, Jun 14, 2007
    #12
  13. freemont wrote:
    > On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 01:29:51 +0000, Blinky the Shark writ:
    >
    >> And large images that are downsized via height and width attributes so
    >> you're still downloading 238kb for a small version, thus saving no
    >> bandwidth (read "time") at all.

    >
    > I've one of the best examples of this EVER.
    >
    ><http://www.hcbe.net/facilities/splost2012/mossy.html>
    >
    > I emailed the guy May 4th but never heard back. It's even worse now that
    > he's added more pictures to the page. When I looked then, there was only
    > the one 8.4MB pic, shrunk down to 238 x 157 with html. Now the page is
    > closer to 15MB.


    Amazing. If you look up "stupid" in the dictionary, I'll bet you'll
    find his photo.


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Jun 14, 2007
    #13
  14. Blinky the Shark wrote:
    > freemont wrote:
    >
    >> <http://www.hcbe.net/facilities/splost2012/mossy.html>
    >>
    >> I emailed the guy May 4th but never heard back. It's even worse now that
    >> he's added more pictures to the page. When I looked then, there was only
    >> the one 8.4MB pic, shrunk down to 238 x 157 with html. Now the page is
    >> closer to 15MB.

    >
    > Amazing. If you look up "stupid" in the dictionary, I'll bet you'll
    > find his photo.


    Indeed -- scaled down from the original 8 megapixels.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    [Geek of HTML/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python/Apache/Linux]
    [OS: Linux 2.6.12-12mdksmp, up 110 days, 22:45.]

    URLs in demiblog
    http://tobyinkster.co.uk/blog/2007/05/31/demiblog-urls/
     
    Toby A Inkster, Jun 14, 2007
    #14
  15. Toby A Inkster wrote:
    > Blinky the Shark wrote:
    >> freemont wrote:
    >>
    >>> <http://www.hcbe.net/facilities/splost2012/mossy.html>
    >>>
    >>> I emailed the guy May 4th but never heard back. It's even worse now that
    >>> he's added more pictures to the page. When I looked then, there was only
    >>> the one 8.4MB pic, shrunk down to 238 x 157 with html. Now the page is
    >>> closer to 15MB.

    >> Amazing. If you look up "stupid" in the dictionary, I'll bet you'll
    >> find his photo.

    >
    > Indeed -- scaled down from the original 8 megapixels.
    >


    Touché! Good one Toby!

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Jun 14, 2007
    #15
  16. Toby A Inkster wrote:
    > Blinky the Shark wrote:
    >> freemont wrote:
    >>
    >>> <http://www.hcbe.net/facilities/splost2012/mossy.html>
    >>>
    >>> I emailed the guy May 4th but never heard back. It's even worse now that
    >>> he's added more pictures to the page. When I looked then, there was only
    >>> the one 8.4MB pic, shrunk down to 238 x 157 with html. Now the page is
    >>> closer to 15MB.

    >>
    >> Amazing. If you look up "stupid" in the dictionary, I'll bet you'll
    >> find his photo.

    >
    > Indeed -- scaled down from the original 8 megapixels.


    Yes! :)


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Jun 15, 2007
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. John
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    4,689
    Mythran
    Oct 23, 2004
  2. roopa
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    769
    Jerry Coffin
    Aug 27, 2004
  3. dackz
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    497
    dackz
    Feb 6, 2007
  4. Replies:
    40
    Views:
    930
    Gabriel Genellina
    May 18, 2007
  5. Roy Smith

    Interesting list() un-optimization

    Roy Smith, Mar 7, 2013, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    18
    Views:
    270
    Roy Smith
    Mar 10, 2013
Loading...

Share This Page