Web sites: favourite good and bad points...

  Taran 23:38 26 Jul 2003

What do you think makes a good site and why ?

I'm curious to know if this or that layout, colour scheme or what have you make a great difference or whether the simple navigation and interesting content form the basis of your favourite sites.

Don't name the addresses of the good the bad and the ugly, but your personal thoughts on the nuts and bolts of what you do and do not like to see on sites might be interesting.

Thanks in advance for any takers on this one.



  Falkyrn 23:49 26 Jul 2003


Ease of use (ie navigation)


I have seen and frequent some sites which are a tad "difficult" on the eye but the content is superb.

Others can be beautiful to look at but there is nothing under the gloss.

It can also be extremely frustrating to find a site with superb content but where simple navigation or the ability to retrace ones steps is impossible.

  slowhand_1000 01:17 27 Jul 2003

I find that if I see a site that is to fussy or that I have to work hard at reading (be it to fussy or bad colour choice)or navigate round then there's a good chance I will look elsewhere. So for me it's a case of:

Ease of navigation.

Links to all sections on each page.

Good clear content rather than pages being full of over the top graphics.

Pop ups I hate, so if I get the same pop up repeated each time I click 'back' then I usually go elsewhere.

I also dislike the massive flash intro's that some designers insist on using. Even with broadband they can take a long time to load.

  Forum Editor 02:27 27 Jul 2003

to paraphrase a certain politician.

Above all else a web site is a means of communication, and the easier it is for the visitor to get the message the more likely he/she is to buy the product or service, or support the charity, or whatever.

To my mind the best sites are those without animated gifs, fancy backgrounds, music, twenty different fonts and ten different colours. A site should look clean and attractive, and be simple to navigate - three clicks from the homepage to the bottom of the site for the average site (although large corporate sites can be forgiven for having a deeper structure).

External links should work, and link to the external site's homepage, no others. There should be well-written text in small bite sized chunks - no massive 1000 word screeds. Research shows that people lose interest in big text blocks, they move on.

Plenty of well-prepared images don't go amiss - properly sized in the image editing program (not dragged to size in the WYSIWYG design application).

No bad language, or bad-taste jokes.

No hit counters or visitors books.

Bah, humbug! I'm off to pull the wings off some flies.

  powerless 05:35 27 Jul 2003


Design (although i'm not to bothered)


A good searching facility (if its needed)

  TechMad 09:35 27 Jul 2003

I know I am probably falling behind most computer users, but I use a monitor with a maximum resolution of 800x600. From personal experience I find that if scrolling horizontally is involved, the "Back" button is the first click I make.

Also if you do use background images, ensure that they are watermarks.

  Taran 10:13 27 Jul 2003

For Christmas this year you're getting a load of coal in your stocking...



Seriously though, thanks for the thoughts so far.

It more or less confirms my own opnions but its always interesting to see what site visitors and users think, since a designer can easily lose track of the fact that their work is to showcase the content, not to showcase them and the wiz-bang talents they may think they have.


This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Moto G6 Play Review: First Look

iPad 9.7in (2018) review

Comment utiliser Live Photos ?