Frames and Userfriendlyness

Why does Google punish frames?

[mifi601]

The context in this forum seems to be 'it's all about the user'.

I think frames are VERY user friendly:

You do not have to reload same content over and over i.e. it saves bandwidth, makes the net faster, enduser gets his content faster, does not have to buy new equipment to get to it etc....

Did Google evolve during a time not all browsers were frames capable? (not that they are now, BUT looking at my logs IE rules)

Did the web change to tables because of Google?
I certainly contemplated changing my whole site into table based, just for SEO reasons ....

The content that is created over and over and over certainly is not what I want, when I sit somewhere with a slow connection (go try it!) and have to wait for all those dynamically created table pages, that tell me basically the same thing.

Any thoughts?

[killroy]

Well I think you cna make great frame less sites. And once we got halfway decent CSS you can use abolute positioning and DIV SRC to load content dynamically.

But I must say, one site which uses a frame to load a long list (about 800 links) of browsable categories jsut cannot be done otherwise. I use javascript compression and its extremely fast even on modem conections. And since it's navigation it HAS to be. there is no way you can load 800+ links in any sort of navigable format without frames.

I'm still looking for a way to get rid of that... probably have to abandon it completely, but my users love it :(

SN

[eWhisper]

One of the reason I don't like sites with frames is most of the time I can't bookmark an individual page within the site and I'm stuck back at the homepage having to try to remember how I got to the one page of content I want to read.

Looking at my server logs, IE does rule, not that it's the best browser, just the default on most machines.

eWhisper

[mifi601]

exactly my point! they are user FRIENDLY

[edit] eWhisper you ar efast ...and you can make them 'bookmarkable'

[albert]

IMHO frames are mostly not so user friendly: problems to bookmark or to print; if found by SE often loaded without navigation frame, and some more reasons. Ok, you can solve most of the frame problems, but that's always extra work to be done.

Except in cases as killroy's I can hardly see any advantages using frames ...

[killroy]

Ultimately I think I will have to create "upser" categories.

But everybody starting off from the homepage of DMOZ knows that that is nmot very browser friendly... after all, most of the time we don't know exactyl what we'Re looking for.

SN

[killroy]

Ultimately I think I will have to create "super" categories.

But everybody starting off from the homepage of DMOZ knows that that is not very browse friendly... after all, most of the time we don't know exactly what we're looking for.

SN

[albert]

@killroy:

1. categories with description and examples of each?
2. search?