Yesterday I tweeted an article about what must be one of the worst websites in the world. It must be seen to be believed. Yet although such terrible sites exist, a far more common problem in web design is sites that are solid enough but ruined by failures to adhere to basic principles. Whether because of client demands or designer oversight, these sites undermine the user experience and harm their business.
I saw a tweet asking for feedback on a new website for a firm in Florida, Ryan Design Group. Competently constructed in a technical sense, it’s a site that demonstrates the problems caused when client demands are at odds with good design practice.
The Good
The site in the main is reasonably well put together. It has a clear design ethos, a solid layout and good use of color. While not truly outstanding design, it’s better than most sites created for small local businesses. It showcases the company’s brand, has a nice (if over-engineered) navigation system, and lays out Ryan Design Group’s work and contact information effectively.
There are no major complaints about the core design and functionality of the site. Nothing to suggest the design company doesn’t know what they’re doing. It’s clear from their wider portfolio that they have the capacity to offer decent web design as part of an overall package of graphic and print services.
The Bad AND The Ugly!
Unfortunately, two huge errors mean the solid core of the site is going to be seen by a lot less people than might otherwise be the case.
Don’t have a lengthy loading Flash splash page.
It’s a core rule of web design, and this site falls straight into that trap. An eleven second Flash animation splash page. The Flash work is well done, but that’s beside the point.
I want to visit a website and immediately be able to access the information I’m looking for. It’s a two stage process; navigate to website then navigate to relevant content. A flash introduction page triples that; navigate to website, splash page loads, I acknowledge I’m not interested, I look for “skip intro”, I click it, I navigate to relevant content. Six steps instead of two.
The splash page adds no value, and a lot less people are going to stay on the site simply because it exists.
- Varying studies suggest that a splash page can reduce click through rates by anything from 25% up to more than 70%. People just give up.
- Flash splash pages lack important keyword phrases and significantly undermine search engine optimization.
Splash pages provide a barrier to information. They can mean the difference between winning new business or losing it.
Don’t embed music on your page, don’t open new windows.
The site automatically loads music, another fundamental error. It compounds this error to ensure the music keeps playing by loading the rest of the site in a new tab/window! This wrests control of the browser from the user and is confusing. I didn’t realize initially that the site had loaded a new window so I couldn’t even work out where the music was coming from!
- Sound loops increase page download times. Load times should be optimized. More than 5% of US internet users still use dial-up (with evidence that in tough economic times more people revert to that cheaper option), and broadband speeds can be variable.
- Musical tastes vary widely. I don’t mind the music on the Ryan Design Group site. Others might be put off because they hate it!
- I’m already listening to music. With online radio stations, iTunes, Spotify, Pandora, Last.FM etc, millions of people are listening to music while they browse. Adding another soundtrack just leads to a horrible clash of noise. It could be even worse; if your visitor is on a Skype phone call while they browse you’ve just messed up their call.
Do You Say “No” To Your Client?
The designers have done what they can to alleviate these huge problems, providing options to skip the Flash introduction and mute the music. But those are such negative issues for a website that there’s little that can be done to avoid the massive downsides to the user experience.
Should the designers have refused to integrate these client requests into the site? I would have. Clients hire me to be a web designer. They acknowledge I know more about web design than them. I’d explain to a client the problems of splash pages and integrated music, and why I wouldn’t do it, regardless of how insistent they were.
That’s a tough path to take. It’s where you have to have the confidence to say to the customer that they’re wrong, and to stick to your guns. I have no idea about this designer’s relationship with the client, their economic situation, or any of the other factors that made they accepted the client’s demands for this site.
I still think they should have said “no”. Every designer makes compromises, but compromise shouldn’t mean agreeing to something that you know is outright bad design practice. A clearly competent designer now has a portfolio piece that fails to demonstrate their ability. The immediate benefit of agreeing to this client’s demands could easily harm their future business.
