Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Worst website 2012

Options
  • 16-10-2012 2:23pm
    #1
    smcelhinney
    Registered Users Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭


    Rather than resurrect old threads, I thought Id start a fresh one. What site, for you, is the pinnacle of poor design?

    For me, its www.powercity.ie.

    I cant even begin to say whats wrong with it. Ok, I will so.
    • Its left aligned
    • Secondly, its left aligned
    • It seems to think that putting text in graphics is ok
    • There's one clickable item in the centre of the page. If you dont like whats in it, tough sh!t.
    • Drop down menu content is longer than most government legislation documents I've seen
    • Did I mention it's left-aligned?

    Anyone else got any "pearls"?


«134

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Have a look at the source - cringeful. It's just as 'all over the place' as the other design elements.

    Send feedback to powercity@clubi.ie

    I could go on..........


  • Options
    #3
    TsuDhoNimh
    Registered Users Posts: 381 ✭✭TsuDhoNimh


    tricky D wrote: »
    cringeful.
    That doesn't even scratch the surface of it.

    On first glance, and in spite of the URL, I honestly thought it was a joke or a spoof site. Especially when I spotted that mail addy that Tricky pointed out.

    It's hard to believe in this day and age that there are sites for businesses that large that are still that poor. Baffling.


  • Options
    #4
    tricky D
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,700 ✭✭✭tricky D


    Just came across: http://dublincarvalet.ie


  • Options
    #5
    GetWithIt
    Registered Users Posts: 2,081 ✭✭✭GetWithIt


    To be honest I don't think that Power City site is the worst. If it was simply centered I'd almost say it has a certain style.

    The source may be ugly but some people might suggest that that was a form of obfuscation. It didn't take an inordinate amount of time to load and I can see straight away the product.

    I'd be more inclined to judge based on money spent. Something that someone slaps together in the bedroom versus something that has uber bucks spent on it are 2 different things.

    Now if someone was to tell me that that Power City site was just launched and cost 100K+ then I might be inclined to pour all manner of vitriol over it.


  • Options
    #6
    smcelhinney
    Registered Users Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭smcelhinney


    tricky D wrote: »
    Just came across: http://dublincarvalet.ie

    Thanks. I can never un-see that. :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    tricky D wrote: »
    Just came across: http://dublincarvalet.ie

    Couldn't even be bothered un-amercanising or correcting the spelling mistakes from the site they ripped their tips section off
    http://www.essortment.com/car-washing-tips-57328.html


  • Options
    #8
    Razzuh
    Registered Users Posts: 184 ✭✭Razzuh


    I used powercity's site recently and it's not too bad to use, although it does look amateurish. I'd call it serviceable. They do have all the information there that you'd want including live stock counts. Their products are well categorised so sorting through them isn't as difficult as on some bigger sites. Most of these might look much better and have fancy filters but don't bother to actually tag their products correctly, so you can't find what you want anyway.

    My nomination would have to be ryanair.com. For such a big international company that depends 100% on its site it's ridiculously poor in every aspect. It's hard to look at, it's hard to use, and it often doesn't work (I've had compatibility trouble using a major browser). Although in fairness, I think it has improved a bit over the years.


  • Options
    #9
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    smcelhinney wrote: »
    It seems to think that putting text in graphics is ok

    It is ok... They're republishing their print ads online!


  • Options
    #10
    TsuDhoNimh
    Registered Users Posts: 381 ✭✭TsuDhoNimh


    smash wrote: »
    It is ok... They're republishing their print ads online!
    If they want to attract visitors to the site based on the content (hint: they should), it's far from ok.


  • Options
    #11
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    TsuDhoNimh wrote: »
    If they want to attract visitors to the site based on the content (hint: they should), it's far from ok.
    Everyone knows power city. Yes their site is rubbish but everyone knows them and people looking for a TV etc will check their site anyway. Bottom line is that they just don't care.

    Apart from that, with the level of content they have and the styling of their ads, there is no way you could support all browsers and be able to quickly release content if you were to go down the CSS route.

    Look at any large consumer company and they embed text in graphics. It's not a big deal! It's all about the look and feel for most people! Vodafone, O2 etc etc... they all do it!

    I'd love to hear your suggestion for them...


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    TsuDhoNimh
    Registered Users Posts: 381 ✭✭TsuDhoNimh


    smash wrote: »
    Everyone knows power city. Yes their site is rubbish but everyone knows them and people looking for a TV etc will check their site anyway.
    I've bought a few TVs over the last few years, mainly through research on the internet. I've never, up until the other day when this thread was posted, visited the PC site. So no, not everyone will check their site.
    smash wrote: »
    Bottom line is that they just don't care.
    This is the problem. They obviously don't and the results they achieve from their site and their online presence in general will match accordingly.
    smash wrote: »
    Apart from that, with the level of content they have and the styling of their ads, there is no way you could support all browsers and be able to quickly release content if you were to go down the CSS route.
    What? That's absurd, of course you could.

    The time it would take to transfer an image file into a standard html template to get the content 'on page' would be a minuscule relative to the results it should provide (assuming there's something of merit within the image to begin with). Even if they're simply linking to the individual products on special offer from the home page, the change in site architecture to prioritise these links for both users and search engines would have a dramatic impact on rankings, click through rates and ultimately purchases.
    smash wrote: »
    Look at any large consumer company and they embed text in graphics. It's not a big deal! It's all about the look and feel for most people! Vodafone, O2 etc etc... they all do it!
    Throwing the names of sites that do it horribly wrong isn't a justification of PC doing it horribly wrong. It just shows that they're not the only one doing it wrong.

    It was only a few months ago that Vodafone were throwing error messages to anyone visiting the non www version of their site (they and cro.ie were always the two huge examples of how not to mess that one up).


  • Options
    #13
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    please tell me how you could easily translate this into css.

    There's what... 38 ads there? And probably a basic CMS with 1 person adding the content. It is not manageable for them to crease it all as text over images. And for SEO, well all their products actually have individual pages with a lot of text on them.

    I find it very annoying when people suggest that it's maintainable for these companies to be able to create these type of ads through a cms using real text because it just isn't. They don't have web teams and they outsource their brochure design work.

    Another example is http://www.lidl.ie - as I say, large consumer brand with high turn over of content and offers. It's all images with text because it works across all browsers and it's easy to maintain.


  • Options
    #14
    SpaceCowb0y
    Registered Users Posts: 4,094 ✭✭✭SpaceCowb0y


    smash wrote: »
    please tell me how you could easily translate this into css.

    There's what... 38 ads there? And probably a basic CMS with 1 person adding the content. It is not manageable for them to crease it all as text over images. And for SEO, well all their products actually have individual pages with a lot of text on them.

    I find it very annoying when people suggest that it's maintainable for these companies to be able to create these type of ads through a cms using real text because it just isn't. They don't have web teams and they outsource their brochure design work.

    Another example is http://www.lidl.ie - as I say, large consumer brand with high turn over of content and offers. It's all images with text because it works across all browsers and it's easy to maintain.

    960 grid??


  • Options
    #15
    TsuDhoNimh
    Registered Users Posts: 381 ✭✭TsuDhoNimh


    smash wrote: »
    And for SEO, well all their products actually have individual pages with a lot of text on them.
    You just answered the question yourself.

    They already have the majority of the content they need.

    Rather than posting a cheap looking print add in the middle of their site, they should simply create a template for showing their current specials in a neat and manageable way, have a sidebar linking to the majority of their most important specials and then a slider highlighting a small selection of the highest priority ones.

    They can't just treat their site as a broadcast medium on which to slap a copy of their print ad. It just won't work and users expect and demand more.
    smash wrote: »
    I find it very annoying when people suggest that it's maintainable for these companies to be able to create these type of ads through a cms using real text because it just isn't. They don't have web teams and they outsource their brochure design work.
    I work with businesses a lot smaller than PC, on far tighter budgets and with far smaller teams available. It is maintainable and is quite easy once the process has been thought about, a structure has been put in place and the team is aware of it.

    The point is that it shouldn't be "these type of ads", it should be a different ad system that works online. Trying to 'recreate' the print ad exactly isn't a solution and wouldn't work (even if you did have the resources to achieve it). It's about finding the best solution for the medium you're working with. If you're simply trying to recreate the print ad on the website it's the equivalent of asking "But how do we get the contact us page to work in the newspaper?". You don't.
    smash wrote: »
    Another example is http://www.lidl.ie - as I say, large consumer brand with high turn over of content and offers. It's all images with text because it works across all browsers and it's easy to maintain.
    I'm not suggesting it's not easy, it's not quick, it's not fast or anything of the sort. I'm saying, not suggesting, that it's not the right way to do it. If you look at it in terms of UI, UX or in terms of the technical impact of doing it, it's terrible.


  • Options
    #16
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    SpaceCowb0y wrote: »

    960 grid??
    This has nothing to do with converting graphics to text


  • Options
    #17
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    TsuDhoNimh wrote: »
    Rather than posting a cheap looking print add in the middle of their site, they should simply create a template for showing their current specials in a neat and manageable way, have a sidebar linking to the majority of their most important specials and then a slider highlighting a small selection of the highest priority ones.
    I agree, but I'm guessing they just don't have the time or resources for it. Sure they don't even link the ads to actual offer details.
    TsuDhoNimh wrote: »
    I work with businesses a lot smaller than PC, on far tighter budgets and with far smaller teams available. It is maintainable and is quite easy once the process has been thought about, a structure has been put in place and the team is aware of it.
    But it's maintainable because its a smaller operation.

    Bottom line is that yes it is a crap site, it's not user friendly and it looks like crap. But still, with their level of content they couldn't manage it better unless they pumped money into it and I really don't think they could be bothered. They're the kind of company that want customers in store, not online. Which is wrong but it's how they operate.


  • Options
    #18
    TsuDhoNimh
    Registered Users Posts: 381 ✭✭TsuDhoNimh


    smash wrote: »
    They're the kind of company that want customers in store, not online. Which is wrong but it's how they operate.
    I think that's the long and the short of it really, and something we're in complete agreement on.

    That alone bugs me as I've personal experience of what a difference it could make to them if they did it properly. From the small things like generating customer trust by making a few very small tweaks to their pages (and generating a proper email address to use) to larger things like completely changing how they use their site (i.e. not just slapping up the print copy) they could make dramatic changes that would have an immediate ROI (less than 3 months) as well as significant long term gains.

    I can only imagine how much money they invest into their print advertising and if even a small portion of that was redirected into their digital activity it would provide significant returns.

    I do agree that you're 100% correct in why they're doing the things they're doing, I even agree with you that they'll continue to do it that way, but I'll never agree that they (or any of the others you mentioned in a similar boat) are doing it correctly. I'd even go one further and say that if they continue to do it the way they are they'll be in trouble and will end up with an unsustainable business.


  • Options
    #19
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    TsuDhoNimh wrote: »
    I do agree that you're 100% correct in why they're doing the things they're doing, I even agree with you that they'll continue to do it that way, but I'll never agree that they (or any of the others you mentioned in a similar boat) are doing it correctly. I'd even go one further and say that if they continue to do it the way they are they'll be in trouble and will end up with an unsustainable business.

    But I never said they're doing it correctly. They're not. It's just how they do it and I'm guessing it's to do with resources or because they have a marketing manager that doesn't know what a computer is.


  • Options
    #20
    SpaceCowb0y
    Registered Users Posts: 4,094 ✭✭✭SpaceCowb0y


    http://www.freakscene.com/index.htm

    Came across this and had to laugh, i would have thought a website for a successful club night would have been a bit slicker but this is pants! Still using a table based layout!


  • Options
    #21
    smcelhinney
    Registered Users Posts: 1,127 ✭✭✭smcelhinney


    Probably should update the title to this, but anyway. I just found an absolute pearl:

    http://www.uissp.ie/

    A local broadband provider in Carlow. Yes, I said "broadband".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    _ciaran_
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭_ciaran_


    smcelhinney wrote: »
    Probably should update the title to this, but anyway. I just found an absolute pearl:

    http://www.uissp.ie/

    A local broadband provider in Carlow. Yes, I said "broadband".

    Yowzer

    Check this bad boy out http://www.lingscars.com/


  • Options
    #23
    Kenny Logins
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭Kenny Logins


    _ciaran_ wrote: »
    Yowzer

    Check this bad boy out http://www.lingscars.com/

    That's not a bad website, it's clever (and very successful) marketing.


  • Options
    #24
    kickslate
    Registered Users Posts: 20 ✭kickslate


    for me this website is pretty awful!
    http://www.eganshouse.com/


  • Options
    #25
    _ciaran_
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭_ciaran_


    Kenny Logins wrote: »
    That's not a bad website, it's clever (and very successful) marketing.

    Clever and successful it may be. However, the design is horrendous.


  • Options
    #26
    _ciaran_
    Registered Users Posts: 94 ✭✭_ciaran_


    _ciaran_ wrote: »
    Clever and successful it may be. However, the design is horrendous.

    Reminds me of this!
    http://divshot.github.io/geo-bootstrap/


  • Options
    #27
    kickslate
    Registered Users Posts: 20 ✭kickslate


    _ciaran_ wrote: »
    Check this bad boy out http://www.lingscars.com/

    Have to agree the design of this is terrible, just far too much going on, too many colour, terrible fonts, too much animation. It really is awful.


  • Options
    #28
    Kenny Logins
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭Kenny Logins


    _ciaran_ wrote: »
    Clever and successful it may be. However, the design is horrendous.

    That's deliberate though, and not a case of plain old 'bad design' as the other examples on this thread are.


  • Options
    #29
    LINGsCARS
    Registered Users Posts: 68 ✭✭LINGsCARS


    Hey Hey, it's Ling! My God, you lot are resurrecting an old thread.

    My website design is *NOT* terrible, it's *BEAUTIFUL* :))

    I will visit the Free State later this year, so might meet a few of you numpties.

    Might bring my parents on a boating trip, as they can nip across freely if they have a UK visa (on Chinese passport).

    Ling!


  • Options
    #30
    Kenny Logins
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭Kenny Logins


    :D


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Kenny Logins
    Registered Users Posts: 9,061 ✭✭✭Kenny Logins


    dogski wrote: »
    I thought I would give it a go to fine a worse website than use had already found but that http://www.lingscars.com/ is the worst in my opinion, its all of the place

    Is your reading broken?


Advertisement