Toby said:
OK, so you've done that; now the user comes along, clicks on your
link and decides she doesn't like the page that you linked to, so she
wants to go back to your site. She clicks the "Back" button on her
browser tool bar: nothing happens. She clicks it again: still
nothing. She is confused, but still hasn't found what she was looking
for, so clicks on the "Home" button on the toolbar to get to Yahoo
search. She searches; she finds your competitor.
"(...) some people can use Windows applications for years without
understanding the concept of task switching. (When I point to the task
bar and ask them what it's for, they can't tell me.) (...) spawning
second browser windows can completely throw users off track because it
removes the one thing they are sure how to use: the 'Back'
button.(...) In another recent study, six out of 17 users had
difficulty with
multiple windows, and three of them required assistance to get back to
the first window and continue the task.
Carolyn Snyder, Seven tricks that Web users don't know: 7. Second
browser windows, June 2001
http://www.snyderconsulting.net/article_7tricks.htm#7
I've seen this argument a lot. The sad fact is, there's not much you can do
about stupid people. My partner once told me in fits of laughter that she'd
discovered her boss didn't know you could run more than one app at a time.
She was watching him and realised he'd start Excel, use it (full screen)
close it, start Word, close that, start Excel... she had to try and keep a
straight face while explaining the basics to him. He'd been using Windows
for years, unaware. It happens.
Most users are savvier than that. Once they've been on the net a short
while, if they've any capability with computers at all, they'll understand
new windows. If they don't, they're probably a dead loss who can't navigate
a form to buy things anyway.
I just opened IE, went to a link list, clicked a link, a new window opened.
I had two options to get rid of it- click the "X" for close or use the
"close" on the File menu. Either way, that just closed that window,
revealing the original link list window beneath. So when our dimwit has
given up with the Back button, she's closed the window and is now back at
the link list- which is what the list owner wants. Even after Yahooing, once
she closes that window our link site comes back up.
And statistically- the dimwits are lost in the figures of additional clicks.
New window simply works better in terms of traffic- which is why everybody
does it. Odds are, she's far more likely to see the link list again if it
spawned a new window than if I hope she'll click Back 20 times to get back
to it after wandering away.
I'd imagine Snyder's example is flawed in that it presumes a "task" to be
carried out. But we're not interested in surfers completing tasks- we're
interested in manipulating their behaviour to our own benefit in this case.
If my primary interest is keeping them focussed on the site exclusively, I'm
better off not giving them any external links at all.
As a couple of asides relevant to this discussion- "target" isn't just about
new windows. It also provides the very important "target=_top" for breaking
of framesets (preventing some third party framing my site for all sorts of
nefarious reasons).
It is also infinitely better IMV than javascripted window.open()s. Not only
does that break for non-javascript users, target opens a new, genuine
browser window whereas javascript frequently results in a chromeless window
lacking any kind of toolbars, navigation controls and so on. They're far
more infuriating. One of my credit card companies forces you to do all your
statements, payments etc in one, apparently because their developers can't
write a site that won't break if people use "Back". Drives me barmy.
Ian
