I agree with a lot of them but some of those are very partial. So if we follow ALL those rules we end up with the same boring websites everywhere. Design is in constant evolution and it'll only do you a disservice ignoring designs just because you don't like it.
Look. İf you want the thing work simplesty is the key. İf you want it to be good looking the UX will decrease. This is something about humans we don't like changes. Just because iphone13 looks like iphone12 this doesn't mean it's boring this means it works !
It's funny, your statement implies websites aren't supposed to be boring. Websites are devices to provide information, written, and visual. that information is about the company and the information is for the client or potential client to learn via the website. Before websites, there were books, pamphlets, and brochures, none I have seen be very exciting. Websites are meant to provide boring information for a company. Website designers are the ones that get bored and decided to spice it up and so it began. The exciting website. bells and whistles, and animated this and flashing that, well, in the e-commerce space the average bounce rate is around almost 50%. A business person comes to a site strictly for business-related information, boring information. he encounters your exciting website, and he bounces, onto the site that gives him the information he needs without all the eye candy. The 50 matter.
I would disagree, you can have very unique and great looking websites while still following them, heres some for example: www.emyth.com/ neoreach.com/ Its up to you if you want to follow them or not, but most if not all of them have us user experience reasons to back it up - its not just because I dont like it. Its about finding how far you want to push usability to stand out, I have a bias wanting to promote the former.
Following all these rules don't mean you'll have a boring website, you'll just have to do more reasonable work to make it not boring and still serve its purpose, making it special at the cost of serving its purpose is lazy... how's avoiding these things will make a website boring? It's like asking an architect to make a house not boring by ignoring the main reason it's called a house...
Notes of the video: * Using sliders: They are ineffective and very few people will see the content beyond the first slide. * Auto-playing sliders: They do not promote a good user experience. * Making users click to see the navigation: If the navigation can fit on one screen, put it on the screen. * Center aligning everything: Especially text that has more than three lines, it becomes annoying to read. * Using justified text alignment: The inconsistency between the spacings of each word makes it harder to read. * Using right alignment for text: Same reason why you shouldn't use center alignment. * Splash pages: They make users work extra to get to the website content. * Slow-loading animations: They make it impossible to quickly scan a website for content. * Hiding the scroll bar: It creates a bad user experience. * Styling the scroll bar: The scroll bar is meant to be a consistent feature to navigate websites. * Horizontally scrolling marquees: They are annoying to look at and difficult to read. * Changing the background color of the website as you scroll: It takes away from the content and it's distracting. * Customizing the cursor: It confuses users. * Forcing users to click a dropdown in the navigation for it to appear: It should appear on hover. * Turning the entire website into a vertical slider: Scrolling should be consistent from website to website. * Using emojis: It looks unprofessional. * Not following web design standards: There's a reason why they exist. * Wasting time with time-consuming opening messages. * Wasting time with long menu animations. * Making the hamburger icon button not look like a hamburger icon. * Using vague h1s on the home page: It's bad for user understanding and SEO. * Using typewriter text changing effects: It's annoying and hurts user experience. * Horizontal submenus: Users expect them to be vertical. * Making the color of your call to action the same color as everything else on your website. * Sticky menus that don't have a background color. * Having separate first and last name fields for forms in small to medium size forms: Combine the two fields into one full name field. * Horizontal scrolling websites. * Small home pages: The home page should be informative enough. * Center aligned text forms: They should always be left aligned for better usability. * Having a menu that just has icons in it: New users shouldn't have to think to be able to use a menu. * Square buttons: People expect buttons to be wide. * Forms without labels. * Hero sections that span the entire height of the screen: It creates a false impression that the website doesn't have more content. * Link in the description to read more about it: If your design is so unintuitive that it requires you to tell me to scroll then your design has failed. * Websites that automatically play sound. * Making users hover over something to see the titles. * Logos that don't have the name of the company in it. * Navigation should always be at the top. * Vertically aligning text: This is another example of sacrificing ux for ui. * Not having the home link in the navigation. * Unloading content with an animation to only have to load it back with more animation. * Preloaders for the making of this video. * Home pages that are just slideshows. * Interrupting vertical scrolling for horizontal scrolling. * Overlays that aren't opaque enough to be able to clearly read the text in front of it. * Text over background always. * Not putting links in the footer. * Overusing visual effects. * Smooth scrolling.
You know, I've been designing web pages since the '90s. And I've never been comfortable with all the flashiness of these newer designs. Seemed to take away from what a website is truly meant to do. And I was told I was being old-fashioned and maybe shouldn't even be in the business of web design. But now I know that it wasn't me all along. It wasn't me. IT REALLY WASN'T ME!!! Great video.
You actually expressed that view amongst your colleagues? And they screamed heretic to you and said why are you even there? You are brave sir, people have been executed for lesser offenses. kidding. You didn't know they were anti-standards, well now you know, and there is a term for them, "faddists". They fall in love with the latest fad. They go out and learn and use it in their designs. Doing that is like an addiction. I do that only reluctantly because you really need to keep up with the latest techniques. But, with your people, it sounds like a religion, to actually question your love for design, because you hold certain thoughts, and imply you don't belong. That my friend is called intolerance, something you'd never expect to find in a design/development shop or department. Well, now we know.
To put it in a paraphrase from Jacob Nielsen: "No one cares about your splash screen. Users just want to get in, do what they need to, and get out as quickly as possible." Most of these (if not all) sins against web design just add flair at the cost of user efficiency. Good list, I approve.
I agree with all but one of these. #15 is actually a big accessibility "pain point". People got used to dropdowns on hover, but technically it should be on click. This is one of those things that got adopted even though it's an incorrect pattern.
I’m glad someone has made a video showing this. Modern web design has become such a headache for users to use. A website should be a simple, informative experience that is eye catching, but it’s easy to over do it. Just because a website is basic in its traditional layout doesn’t make it bad; the product or service you’re promoting is more important than the design.
You do make good points, but a lot of these seem like they stem from a belief that there's a set 'correct' way to make a website. While there are certainly 'incorrect' ways, some of which you did touch on, there's also shades of gray within all this. I think you demonstrated this bad/good approach best with your point about not using emojis in your design, since it doesn't look professional - maybe, but not everything in life is 'professional', there are brands out there that may benefit from the goofiness of a crying laughing emoji. There are also brands that may benefit from a mostly eyecandy website, since websites aren't always about being a cold conversion funnel, building brand image is not a thing you can really always box with the same old tired 'we're a company that does things for these clients, contact us' layout. Contact buttons aren't always bad, too. You may not care much about leads, in which case a simple button taking the user to their mail client is perfectly fine. Context matters, and context varies, vastly.
I was looking for a comment like this, I definitely agree with you! I study graphic design and even though this video had some useful tips, some other ones really hurt creativity. It really depends on the target audience and the goal of the websites. Sometimes it's better to go for a more interactive website which can retain users attention for longer or to switch something up with the goal of leaving a long lasting impression, than to go for a traditional website. Yes, users may not be used to some of these features but technology and design is progressing and newer generations are getting used to them already, so why stay behind if we want to appeal to them?
I love your straight forward explanation, and same for me, these annoys me a lot, where I've to think twice where the button is , what the site really stands for, and literally the pre loading shit, i don't have that much of time to wait for couple of minutes for the site to load it's stuff. I really liked your explanation, would really love to see more content in the future,till then lemme watch some of your old ones.
Would love an updated list that takes into account ADA compliance requirements. Several of these reference design choices that don’t meet WCAG 2.1 (2.2 is being finalized soon, too). As designers, it’s our job to make content accessible to all. Thank you for taking steps to move the community forward.
Absolutely. It depends on your goals. If it's a normal contact form, 1 is fine. If you're going to be emailing them regularly and want to have a casual hello with their first name after it, separating first and last name is essential.
Agree, there is a lot of names where I am not sure if its first name or last name and if you contact you client or customer you don't want to address him/her with first name, it is unprofessional, unless it is part of your branding a you speak to everyone with their first name. But again you must known what is the first name.
Came across some of your videos while trying to design my own website. I agree with everything you say and can't believe more web designers don't realize the negatives of their designs. Thanks for the knowledge
WOW just WOW!!! Love this and If you listen with the right ears you will know that he just summerized 3 yrs of university studies of design, graphic design and psychology. PLUS biz strategies and how to increase ROI!! Dude you are probably a lot more intelligent than people give you credit for!!! I see you!!! Can't belive I found you just now!!!
While I agree with many (if not all), it is the be handled subjectively. If you are making a website that is more fashion over function, then do whatever you want to achieve it. If you want a Henry Ford-esque guide to an effective user experience, this is the list to follow. It’s not sexy, but it works.
Good stuff. The one i don't agree with is "Having a HOME link in the navigation" because not everyone knows the logo serves that purpose. I'd say unless you're designing for old people or less tech-savvy it's pretty standard. I'd say if anything put HOME in the footer.
i actually find hover menus annoying. Cause sometimes Im trying to reach something else but it gets in the way. I think so,e of these are fine for portfolio because you are trying to show off what you do and flashy can get the client’s attention
Hey, could you make the exact list but with opposite areguments? I think id'd be fun to see the completely different ouput with a different perspective. Great content btw. Thank you as alwyas
I totally agree!! We visit websites to purchase or get product information as quickly as possible, not to be amused by the "WOW!" kind of Cool design. Why are so many "web desinger" misunderstood? Right?
Really good video, I learned a lot and I am glad that someone has put to words some of my own bugbears. 3:02 , I will say one thing though 'Don't mess with web design standards' - The reason we have standards and that they change is because people messed with what considered standard at that time, and they were found to be better. If someone didn't mess with standard when websites first becamse available on touch screen, imagine all the 2004 styles header navbar content footer pages we would have to try to click through on portrait mode
Missing scrollbars are a particular pet peeve of mine. Also, this video demonstrates the difference between creative minded and business minded designers. Creatives can make a site too stylish and unintentionally missout on sales opportunities
Every piece of advice you've provided is incredibly helpful and valuable. Your tips are so skillfully structured that breaking even one of them could lead to a significant misstep. Thank you for sharing this exceptional content. I'm delighted to become one of your subscribers. ❤
Literally none of these are “bad” or “wrong”. This entire video is made up of personal preference with zero data attached, while ironically treating every design choice like an accident that should’ve wanted to be a Wordpress blog built to accomplish the legible text award.
I encourage you to check out this article www.nngroup.com/articles/hamburger-menus/, which outlines precisely how one of the mistakes I mentioned in the video is bad or wrong. It's a cherry-picked example, but I believe 95% of the mistakes in the video directly hurt user experience.
I usually found that: less is better. Add the necesarry, but don't add things because you can. Try to do the most with the most simple and basic. If you your content is a title, some text and a couple of images, use a standard format that anyone can follow. Focus in choose a good font, make sure the aligment and contrast is okay, make the spacing consistant, choose a good color pallete, etc. Is not "what can I add to this" but instead" what's needed?" Ask yourself: how can I do it in a way that is simple, elegant, and standard.
I'm binging all of your videos right now. So pissed at YT for not showing me content like this instead of the kiddie meme crap. Ok, rant over. Thanks for the value.
I am torn here... Personally, and a lot of other people I talk to, prefer a unique design over the same one. Half of this boils down to making it look like every other website. I don't think that makes any impact on someone if they don't remember your website because it looks the same as the other one they just clicked. Some of these mistakes, I think are bad because they were executed poorly. Though, I think these ideas make things that people would remember you or your product. I think it's a matter of balance.
The answer is to make your website unique enough to be remembered yet familiar enough to easily use. Just because there's a 50-odd things you shouldn't do to your website, doesn't mean you can't create a great, unique, rememberable, and easy to use website.
I laughed out loud at the point, "You're not special just because your logo is placed on the right side." By the way, great insight. I agree with some parts and disagree with others.
I think the exception to this (or rathere these 50) rule is for portfolio websites for web designers who actually want to exhibit their skillset and how they have the technical expertise to push boundaries their potential client would possibly want
What do you mean by ‘push boundaries’ if it doesn’t have a good Ux? Sometimes it’s just ego, some designers are more worried trying to demonstrate their hyper creative skills to their competitors instead to their potential clients.
I totally agree with @romarina2687. If your client can't navigate your site easily they are probably gonna jump ship and find someone who's site is more user friendly and easy to use. The high end clients aren't really impressed by how unique your site is while making a dogwater UX. The clients just wanna know that you have a certain amount of social presence and want some proof that you can do what you claim to do. The more coginitive load it is for the user, the quicker they are gonna get out of the site. Your portfolio isn't a drama or a movie. Understand why and what kind of users are coming to your site and how they navigate it. A poor UX just feels like the designer doesn't even know his/her users and how can clients place their trust on someone like that?
Haha, this is wonderful! GOLD! 🏆 and I love how salty you sound at some of these design elements (flaws…) I see some folks taking every point personally, which I think is a necessary, because in general you’re pretty on the money. Thank you for the great content
I think it means that when you scroll it moves to the next section to keep it fully align with the screen. In another video, he mentions this. (I think it's the homepage video)
It would be much better if this video had the mistakes fixed after pointing them out. Maybe you can make a video like that where you take 10-15 points from this video and show us how what you suggest s actually better (I do think majority of it was rightly called out btw). Thanks for educating us, man.
So if these sites are doing wrong, then why they are trendy on Awwwards. Come on man in Industry the one person prospective doesn't matter. Industry survives with trends and opinion of many peoples.
0:37 Rare accessibility recognition for "very little people"; as web developers, we must realize that people such as Warwick Davis and Peter Dinklage also use the web. I agreed with 100% of the 50 points you made, and may I offer an additional point that makes my blood boil? And it's one that I never see anyone mention, and that's aggressive text truncation. Notorious offenders include the Apple help forums, which force the user to click "show more" on every single response, regardless of length - even a reply that spans only three sentences! And of course there are the ubiquitous phrases of anything longer than five words that get the ellipsis treatment (sometimes impossible to expand!). RU-vid itself is notorious for this one, forcing users to click a video just to see the entire title. This problem also plagues side menus and drop-down options (BitBucket and JIRA are egregious offenders, often concealing crucial information). What's a few extra bytes of text in an age of streaming content!? Let me read the text, FFS! 😡💨
Splash pages serve a purpose, not just another entrance. Most of the time, a splash page is being used as a lead magnet by affiliate marketers or someone who doesn't own the content on the final destination page. These are marketers trying to grow their email list, not designers adding an extra step just for the fun of it, lol.
Separating them is the way to go if you’re connecting user data to a CRM platform. If it’s just a small business contact form, then I think merging the fields is fine.
Most are correct. but if all web designers and developers will avoid all your website design mistakes, I feel like all websites will become boring and not modern. Other users or visitors appreciate modern and interactive websites. But you have most of the points correct.
There are quite a lot of websites that follow most if not all of these rules and are doing great as businesses. For example take github, stripe,microsoft, apple,etc. Even apple uses animations only on their products page and in a way where the UX is still good and not over the top. I believe lots of website designers just want to stand out so much and kind of blow their trumpet that they design this insanse looking website when it's usually not the purpose of the website.
I agree with maybe 50% of them but your opinion is not ubiquitous. Maybe take a poll next time and see where the vast majority of people fall on these techniques before condemning them.
Doesn't activating the navigation dropdowns on hover take out control from the user? I know it is a common practice, but not sure if it is the better option. This might be more evident with megamenus.
Tbh this is one ive recently had some updating beliefs on, im still unsure about it. I would say that because hover is still very common I would stick to using that. The problems with hover (like accidentally getting out of box boundaries in a sub-dropdown) can be solved with some thought and proper spacing. My thoughts so far!
Smooth scrolling is something people add to a website to alter the way the scroll works when using the scrollwheel on your mouse. It feels as if your scrollwheel is on ice when scrolling. The scrollwheel is a feature that should be consistent across websites. Its one of the most important features people use in a browser to view a website, and hence why you should'nt go changing peoples control of it.
agree with most but some of these feels like you're just butt hurt about something, contrast is a thing and sometimes to stand out would be a good thing as opposed to a bad one when pulled off correctly, it's better to say that it is not for just anyone to try to pull off these stunts
I have to say I severely disagree with #44 in the context of websites selling cars or other expensive, configurable goods. The #1 factor for good conversion there is not a fast UI, it's having a 3D configurator where people can set up "their" car. Those things take time to load. If we're talking about just loading a video for a background I agree completely, though.
I'm sorry but can you explain the number 50 for me pls. I don't know whether he means that "smooth scrolling" is a mistake or "smooth scrolling" is the standard that designers shouldnt f*ck with??
In Tip 15, what about the 'hover tunnels' that get created ??? You did mention it in the header video when you said, we can make it 'click' rather than Hover to avoid the hover tunnel issue, please highlight on this ?
Tbh, you cant be like a BlackBerry in Apple era. No doubt some mistakes are actually very crucial, but you can't just say what arent to be done on a website. Based on the client, the website and the information they show UI/UX changes. So all of them arent applicable all the time. And for me personally, some of the mistakes that you've mentioned, they are from your perspective. So you cant address these mistakes will make a bad UX for people (surely it might for some of them), but since it's from your POV, you will not like such websites. You cant assume everyone to be/think like you.
Same. The moment I see one of these silly modern websites, I'm immediately put off, because it's the same crap I see everywhere. I would honestly prefer an early 90s or early 2000s website design.
As someone who's actively and deliberately studied info architecture, user experience, accessibility, and design, I find that this list is a bit too extreme. I hate most of the same things but following this list to the tee will result in a 2016 Bootstrap 3 generic corporate site that is indistinguishable from any other without using garish color palettes or extravagant and gaudy typefaces. Not all of them are inherently evil and if you want to make a website stand out and convey any feelings at all you have to break the big standard mold. It's a game of balance if you're using more than one or two of the more subjective ones, you should probably reconsider and scale it back. If you're consciously and carefully using one in a particular context in which it adds enough value to offset the detriment (depending on your audience and brand, a detriment to one might be a boon to others) then that helps give the site and brand more memorable or engaging. Most people don't understand the actual, and justified rational for these guidelines so they just grab anything that is uncommon and flashy.
In another video you said it's okay to use the click to show dropdown as someone cannot mistakenly get out of focus. And clicks are better for retaining focus and not lose focus of active dropdown. Which is the good one now?