| 3:47 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
You're not supposed to describe the action a visitor must perform in order to visit the page you're recommending - you're supposed to describe the recommended page.
Lots of centred <hr> lines, separating groups of paragraphs all the way down a twenty screen length page.
I haven't used <hr> for about 5 years >;->
| 4:54 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Anybody remember email campaigns? They belong on this list in about three months minus a political miracle.
|too much information|
| 4:59 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I think the point of the "click here" was that it is on the splash page of the site and you already clicked to enter the site so what's up with the "click here to enter" when you already tried to enter the site once.
I really hate it when these are flash "click here"s because not only do I have to "click here" to see what I'm looking for but now I have to wait for it. :o¦
Oh... background music. "Look buddy, I'm at work trying to goof off, don't try to get me fired by playing some stupid midi just because you found out how!" *sorry, just a little tangent there
| 5:45 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Those horrid rainbow coloured horizontal bars. <shudder>
| 6:06 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
| 6:36 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I think it's worth mentioning that Java (as in JSP) can by a fine choice. Java _applets_ are the shockers.
I'm still stunned every time I see them still being used on Yahoo.com.au.
Black background / white text anyone? (ArsTechnica I'm looking at you)
Bookmark us pleeeeeeeeease!
| 7:12 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
- any website that needs to launch in a new window
-- (bonus points if it is entirely flash-based)
-- (more bonus points if the page underneath only has a button that says "Click to Relaunch The Site")
| 7:13 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Did anyone mention the spinning 3D 'E' for "email us"?
How about tables for layout?
and no, i dont buy the "but some browsers..." excuse. If you develop websites, it's your job to know how to use the technology available.
|troels nybo nielsen|
| 8:24 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
"Hi, I'm Jimmy, I'm mad about <insert pop star>, <insert movie star> and <insert sports star>, here are some cool links:"
Websites with absolutely no hint as to when they were last updated.
> How about tables for layout?
Especially when "important notices" are put in a big, ugly table with borders and a background colour that screams at you.
| 9:33 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Greetings and Gidday from downunder folks,
now kiddies .... just remember when you first started ...
Yikes! <confession> I still HAVE at least 3 of the listed peeves on my home page </confession>,
I do agree whole heartedley with most of the aforementioned, however, as also discussed in other "pet peeves/so yesterday" threads here on WebmasterWorld, some of these design features have their place, used judiciously.
Especially "click here", if the usability surveys and personal experience are anything to go by. I had nary a CH in sight up to 9 months ago, where I resisted using it, and click thru' rates began to suffer, under 40% sometimes.
As soon as I tweaked the design, with a keyword link in the par. ;-), and included a following "click here for more info ..." or "more info here ..." prompt, click thru rate went up to over 50%.
There's nothing wrong with an obvious call to action used appropriately, especially if your site is selling something. e.g. click here to view a pop up window of this large photo. (xkb), click here to order/make an enquiry etc..
Some people just don't initially know that an underlined word/s in a different colour from the rest of the text is a link.
Shocking - but true, I've seen it!
And if your site is the first one they land on when they go solo ....
So please, don't underestimate the newbie factor and knock the textual cues that some people will find helpful to get around what is essentially a visual medium.
Cheers and Hooroo
| 9:38 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Dancing Bologna (or baloney): [dancentury.com...]
|Sometime in the late 1990's someone coined the phrase "dancing bologna" to describe superfluous and garish web design elements that marketing departments love, but the average customer will ultimately loathe. |
| 9:56 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Disabling the right mouse button!
| 10:53 am on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|too much information|
| 1:07 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
alright, alright, I have finally seen enough complaints about the stupid right mouse button. As soon as I learn a little Flash* to protect my images I'll put the "right mouse" script away.
*I do mean a very little. As a rule I hate Flash more than I have time to describe. And I promise not to have those stupid little thin lines dancing around!
How about the note saying something like, "These images are low resolution" in the mean time you spend the next 10+ min. waiting for the 14 images to load on your broadband connection because they are all over 2 Megs and forced into size within the <img> tag.
| 1:56 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I cannot believe that nobody has mentioned those awful background images that were so prevalent in the 90's. No only did you have to deal with the same annoying photo on every page, but you had to squint in the areas were the text was the same color of the background.
| 2:03 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Disabled right mouse button garbage is easy to get past.
Just press 'ESC' at the same time you right click and 'presto!' the context menu appears.
"Save Picture as..." here I come.
| 2:34 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|Just press 'ESC' at the same time you right click and 'presto!' the context menu appears. |
Ahhhhhh.. now I can stop mucking around in view->source.
| 3:00 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
This is a great thread. Guilty on a couple of counts, one of which I've fixed, and the other I won't be repeating.
I agree with much of what everyone else has said, and I would add :
-stock images of people on the phone/computer, in business suits, shaking hands etc
-grid patterns over these stock images
Template-based designs tend to have an obvious style which you see everywhere, even on sites that aren't from a template. I try to avoid this look. Websites selling templates are often a good gauge of this year's fashions (or the year before's). Next year requires something new.
| 3:57 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
[edited by: korkus2000 at 4:02 pm (utc) on Mar. 17, 2004]
[edit reason] [webmasterworld.com...] [/edit]
| 4:05 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
tables at all . . . ;)
Or css layouts that are really only two or three bordered divs and no style. You'd think somebody intent enough to design their site with CSS would posses some creativity.
But I'm not sure if that qualfies as "90's", more like '00 - '02.
| 5:38 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Who needs right clicks? Just install IE6 and when you hover over an image for a moment, a "save image as..." icon appears :)
As for what someone wrote:
|Another thing to add to my pet hates - the hidden online-support email address. |
Typically to get to it you have to go through a lengthy help routine, going around and around, before you spot the obscure page on which they hide their email address.
I've run a couple of mass audience sites and I can say I did just that. After a couple of weeks you just get very tired of people asking the same simple question (which is answered in the first line of the FAQ) over and over and over and over...Your time can be spent more productively than answering those. You have to MAKE some people read the FAQ.
| 6:02 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
They are very good when it Calls for action. ;)
| 6:03 pm on Mar 17, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|after a couple of weeks you just get very tired of people asking the same simple question |
I have used an autoreply with the top FAQs in it, and then a second step at the end of that email of confirming that these are not the issues therefore generating a real Trouble Ticket with success. But NEVER put the answer in the first line - for some reason the problem users always skip that line.
| 12:35 am on Mar 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
This is a great list!
I'm guessing those who have never committed any of these "sins" just haven't been doing Web design long enough. So, just to categorize/sum up once again:
Cheesy/small/(hopefully early '90s) sites Hit counters
Under construction road signs with the animated workmen
gratuitous photo of the owner
a photo of the site owner's wife, children, friends, dog, cat, house, boat, or bicycle
clipart on every page
Best Viewed With / Optimized for [my favorite browser]
click here and/or entry pages(?) (tempered by judicious use of call to action "click here for x...")
"This site named Joe's Site of the X" or "Top 5% of the Web!"
Inverted-L shaped frames
cheap midi music
anything that flashes
<blink> or <marquee>
Having a place for the (10+) awards your site has won and all the guilds and compliance logos
Animated email icons
image maps & map files
"Netscape Now" buttons and any flavour of this button
Bookmark us pleeeeeeeeease!
"Hi, I'm Jimmy, I'm mad about <insert pop star>, <insert movie star> and <insert sports star>, here are some cool links:"
Websites with absolutely no hint as to when they were last updated
Those who have the technology and think they might as well use it - badly huge Flash animations that blink "Loading"
rotating 3D text
flash intros with lots of thin lines moving all over the place
IE transition effects
Any excessive use of bandwidth that does not contribute to the marketing purpose of the website
Frontpage 98 templates
Just bad graphic design the swoosh logo and its variants
tiny text in tight pixel pushed fixed width layouts
Anything with a gradient
colorful tiled background images with the text almost matching the bg
Really bad color arrangements - like they were done with a gray-scale monitor by a color-blind rabbit
Pages that looks like a car full of clowns had crashed into a Sherwin Williams paint truck
"High on Kai" - Excessive use of Kai's Power Tools to create textured bevelled shapes to be used as buttons, bullets etc.
Text graphics or buttons where the default photoshop layer style is applied (bevel, shadow, etc.)
Photoshop Solar Flair effect
Over use of drop-shadows
Dancing bologna (http://www.dancentury.com/text/webbologna.html [dancentury.com])
tiled backgrounds with a grained texture
rainbow coloured horizontal bars
Black background / white text
When "important notices" are put in a big, ugly table with borders and a background colour that screams at you
awful background images - not only did you have to deal with the same annoying photo on every page, but you had to squint in the areas were the text was the same color of the background
stock images of people on the phone/computer, in business suits, shaking hands etc.
grid patterns over these stock images
Just bad Web design graphical effect with nested table borders
800px wide pages that display on the left side of the screen in higher resolutions
text that expands to full width making the lines too long and difficult to read
the dreamweaver netscape 4 resize layer function
gratuitous use of iframes
gratuitous use of IE scrollbar css
"click to enter" entry pages (similar to splash pages)
horizontal rules <HR> (or...Lots of centred <hr> lines, separating groups of paragraphs all the way down a twenty screen length page)
Whole websites on one single html page where you have to scroll and scroll and then scroll some more
spacer gif overkill
Client side shopping carts (Actinic etc.)
Times New Roman
Java (esp. Java applets), Shockwave, Flash
Annoyances annoying animated banners
"Gold boxes" (as used on a major bookstore site)
anything that auto does anything obnoxious on a index page - the pop ups that speak...
popups that dont sit still so you can close them
live chat now, forced upon you when browsing the site
the hidden online-support email address
video and audio feeds in a proprietary format... requires <brand> to play...
Relying on adobe acrobat for pdf downloads
Graphics floating around your mouse pointer
"We've Detected that you don't have the Flash 4 Plug-In, and locked your browser up trying to do so"
Browser window resizing to full screen
Rapid redirect so the back button won't work
Sites that lock me out because I'm not using IE
E-commerce sites that requires a street address (some of us don't have street addresses)
Wide pages, where the right part of the page is truncated when you print them
any website that needs to launch in a new window(bonus points if it is entirely flash-based ¦ more bonus points if the page underneath only has a button that says "Click to Relaunch The Site")
Disabling the right mouse button
Bloat Text as an image when normal text would do / use of images to create a text style
Rollovers using looping animated GIFs
"These images are low resolution" in the mean time you spend the next 10+ min. waiting for the 14 images to load on your broadband connection because they are all over 2 Megs and forced into size within the <img> tag
Coders should know better... Non secure forms...http://www. domain .com/enter-all-your-personal-info-here-for-a-loan-form.html
A email confirmation with complete said form info...
Completely idiocyncratic (ultra-personal tweakish HTML) code
Forms that you download as a Word 6 document and then fax
We'll submit your site to 50,000 search engines
tables for layout / tables at all
Bad use of text/content The sentence that has every character a different color to make a rainbow
Black backgrounds with primary colored text
keyword madness: "...(keyword) 10,000 pages of blah blah text (keyword)..." or "If you're searching for [insert keyword here] or [insert keyword here]..."
faint gray text on a white background
copy that tries to be genuine but is only there to try and apearcredible, so the site can sell something
sites designed solely to sell product, with no mention anywhere of that fact.
sites and domain names with no real address, name, phone, etc.
sites that made their name selling one product and have expanded into others - badly. Who wants to buy underwear at a bookshop?
atadams: I liked "Dancing bologna" - summed up a lot of these quite nicely
As a bad use of text/content, I'd add using "Welcome to..." in the title bar, main page, etc. It's bad for SEO and generally bad/bloated/useless content
| 12:47 am on Mar 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Pages that fade in and out
| 12:55 am on Mar 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
YEA! Those java page transition effects.
(actually most of these '90s-things were garbage when they were coded... they just didn't know it)
| 9:15 am on Mar 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
entire pages that have been made in photoshop, sliced in image ready (or FW) and exported with messy tables, the one central image has been deleted and 10px fixed text pasted in instead. all the other images have been left in place instead of being sliced or marked up properly.
ive had to make changes to someone elses site like this recently and not only are they bandwidth hogging spaghetti code beasts, they are really difficult to update. especially when the info youve got to change is part of the "structure", e.g a phone number that is actually an image, or the whole things breaks if your go one line over the word count limit.
even worse when they dont even bother to replace the text, and you just get a big fat .gif for the content.
| 10:03 am on Mar 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
|entire pages that have been made in photoshop, sliced in image ready (or FW) and exported with messy tables |
LOL! My first site was exactly that. I hate to say it, but when I was doing my graphic design degree 5/6 years ago, this was how they told us to make web pages!
| 10:21 am on Mar 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
Sites built on templates that give a pet shop the same look as a car dealer.
...and looking back from the end of this decade....
Online payment by card - because all payments will get linked into your bank account automatically using voice/fingerprint recognition with satellite or wireless or telepathy (don't ask me how, except that satellite already has the ability to locate you sitting at your PC).
| 2:01 pm on Mar 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
I don't think tables should be rejected out of hand. As vaild html they have their place, and for some layouts they are the only solution guaranteed to work in all browsers without a mutlitude of hacks. But of course they should not be used where divs are more appropriate.
Another caveat is that we are judging design from a Western viewpoint. For instance almost every Chinese site uses the expression "Welcome to...". In fact usually a stock 4 character phrase "Welcome gracious presence to...". It's considered good manners.
Similarly a design we consider elegant with an appropriate use of white space, to a non-Westerner may look empty. The majority of Chinese home pages are incredibly busy with hardly any space left uncovered. Almost all the text is a link, sometimes whole paragraphs.
I suspect that as the number of Asian websites grows, their influence will be seen in the design of Western sites, particularly where international corporations want a standard look. It happened to automobile design, so why not web sites?
| 2:17 pm on Mar 18, 2004 (gmt 0)|
This page last updated on 9/8/1998. We'll be adding more articles every week, so be sure to visit often!
|So what is "so '90s" in Web design? |
| This 164 message thread spans 6 pages: < < 164 ( 1 2  4 5 6 ) > > |