The Size of a Search Box

[tedster]

In reading Jakob Nielsen's latest usability book, I noticed that he criticizes the big sites over and over again for making their search boxes too skimpy. I also have been bugged by this. On some sites it's hard to tell whether you've made a typo or not. And most site searches won't handle a typo very well. They just return no results, and then the visitor is gone.

We can see Nielsen's influence in that great big search box that Google uses — and isn't it a joy?

I don't really have a question here, just wanted to get up on my soapbox for what I feel is an important point. Come on, designers, lets not make pretty more important than practical.

[toolman]

Here, here tedster.

MSN goofed big time with their recent redesign...but their motives may be to keep you at their site anyway.

[tedster]

Yeah, that MSN page is a fiasco. It can take 30 seconds to download on a 56k modem. By the time the images would be visible, I've already typed a search term and clicked. I can never tell you what they are pushing.

One of Nielen's related observations is that sites which aren't search engines are foolish to include "Search the Web" boxes next to their site search. That's like inviting people to leave. I never did understand the point -- do people really think they will become a preferred web search site for their visitors?

[toolman]

>>>do people really think they will become a preferred web search site for their visitors?

I think it's a "just because it's a free service we'll stick it on the site" kinda thing.

With things looking to get tighter in the economy...it only makes sense to do it right.

[Brett_Tabke]

It had been awhile since I'd used the homepage at Google. The extra wide input is very nice.

[Xoc]

Nielsen recommends that a search box allow 35 characters to be typed without scrolling. Very few sites on the web allow that.

[tedster]

This is one of those "aesthetics vs. functionality" trade-offs that make the web so frustrating. If Nielsen recommends 35 characters, I'd bet that he has very solid reasons -- not just subjective opinions, but extensive test data that supports 35 characters as optimal.

I'd further bet that implementing 35 characters would increase site stickiness. But I can also see designers shaking their heads about that big, ugly input box distracting your eye from the rest of the page.

It's an age-old wrestling match: Image vs. Substance. And everyone has a line they won't cross in sacrificing appearance for functionality. But many times the line is drawn much too far toward the Image side of the equation, and that hurts the business's ultimate purpose.

Google wears their oversized search box like a badge of honor -- but after all, they're not just offering site search, they ARE a search engine.

[Brett_Tabke]

Since there are browsers that allow users to set their own input box font (both multiline textareas and text inputs), I don't think you can count on any width being static accross browsers.

I've always wondered where the limit is on width. Is 40 or 45 too many? I've been using 45 for the default text area here, but I run my text input at 100 columns (set from your profile).

I also noticed that google doesn't have the larger form input on the serps.

[keyplyr]

What is the proper way to define the size of the box? I used size=30 and received an error from the Net Mechanic validator.

added: the error was because I had not included the type=text Now it validates.