Worst website ever!

[ProviaFan]

I found this over at DPReview, where the owner [rightfully IMHO] got criticized endlessly for his website's design. Let's see if you can access the underwater pictures, let alone find them.

What do you all think? If you can find something worse, go ahead and show it off!

 

[dighn]

i can't access the pics b/c it's password protected?

 

[Drakkon]

its bad but its not not HORRIBLE...i mean i can get to the albums but without a password i can't access them...what are you guys saying is wrong with it?
sure it can use a few graphics and it is an entirely flash built site which doesn't lend anythign to it but it seems like its working ok for me...

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: dighn
i can't access the pics b/c it's password protected?

That's the point - it's not supposed to be... everything about that website sucks.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: Drakkon
its bad but its not not HORRIBLE...i mean i can get to the albums but without a password i can't access them...what are you guys saying is wrong with it?
sure it can use a few graphics and it is an entirely flash built site which doesn't lend anythign to it but it seems like its working ok for me...

The resized (not maximized, so it screws with your browser's default size) full-screen popup window, for one... (not to mention the hideous UI) :|

 

[znaps]

I've seen much, much worse. But it is pretty bad if it's a commercial site.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: znaps
I've seen much, much worse. But it is pretty bad if it's a commercial site.

Yes, it's a commercial site. Obviously, I've seen some crappier stuff made by teenagers on geocities in 1999, but this was the most cluttered, confusing, and slow (even on my 1536/384kbps DSL connection and decent computer) commercial site that I've seen of late.

 

[Rip the Jacker]

Originally posted by: ProviaFan

Yes, it's a commercial site. Obviously, I've seen some crappier stuff made by teenagers on geocities in 1999, but this was the most cluttered, confusing, and slow (even on my 1536/384kbps DSL connection and decent computer) commercial site that I've seen of late.

Then it is NOT the worst website ever. Maybe the worst commercial website YOU'VE seen but that site is Godly compared to what I have seen..

 

[sourceninja]

http://www.greymatter.org/satanichamsterdance/

nuff said

 

[T9D]

It's not all that bad. I can't stand flash sites though. And it does take a while to load.

 

[TheVrolok]

Not the worst I've seen, but it's pretty bad for a commercial site.

 

[homercles337]

Thats just hiddeous. That gratuitous use of flash, resizing popups, unnecessary numbers moving, sh!t scrolling/moving about, ugh. That site is utter sh!t Designers with no knowledge of usability should NOT build web sites. Normally, i send email to ignorant fvcks like this to explain the finer points of usability and how flash totally and utterly destroys usability all together. I have yet to get a "thank you" for all my efforts.

[edit] Im at work, otherwise i would not have even been able to see that since i refuse to install flash on any personal machine. [/edit]

 

[JustAnAverageGuy]

I've seen worse.

 

[boran]

he could have used comet cursor

my opinion of bad sites are the ones made by script kiddies, they see a nice javascript they add it to their site, flashing moving text, tails or clocks around yer cursor, etc...

that and fancy color schemes together makes for one bad site, but I'm sure every one of us has encountred em.

 

[statik213]

Originally posted by: sourceninja
http://www.greymatter.org/satanichamsterdance/

nuff said

lol

 

[Mark R]

That is pretty bad for a commercial site. Popups, sound effects, needless distracting animations, slow loading (even with broadband), flash only with no HTML fallback, you need to open a new browser window for each photogallery - you can't just naviagate in one window. I wonder how much it cost to develop?

Flash and javascript have their place - (I use both on a site that I'm developing) but if you can't do something useful with it, then don't use it.

It's worth reading the W3C accessibility guidelines - although the main scope of the document is improving usability for disabled users or users with limited computer resources (e.g. smartphone) a lot of the points made are relevant to many web sites.

If you are operating a commercial site, you should consider that anti-discrimination laws may apply to information published, or services provided, over the web (some countries have specific legislation). Failing to make a commercial site accessible could put you at risk of a discrimination lawsuit.

 

[ProviaFan]

Originally posted by: Mark R
That is pretty bad for a commercial site. Popups, sound effects, needless distracting animations, slow loading (even with broadband), flash only with no HTML fallback, you need to open a new browser window for each photogallery - you can't just naviagate in one window. I wonder how much it cost to develop?

Flash and javascript have their place - (I use both on a site that I'm developing) but if you can't do something useful with it, then don't use it.

Amen!

It's worth reading the W3C accessibility guidelines - although the main scope of the document is improving usability for disabled users or users with limited computer resources (e.g. smartphone) a lot of the points made are relevant to many web sites.

If you are operating a commercial site, you should consider that anti-discrimination laws may apply to information published, or services provided, over the web (some countries have specific legislation). Failing to make a commercial site accessible could put you at risk of a discrimination lawsuit.

Absolutely. I try to follow the W3C guidelines in things I design to the best of my ability.

BTW, your photo galleries look great, not to mention that they're a heck of a lot easier to navigate. :thumbsup:

 

[kamper]

All I saw was a big, blank, grey screen. Not even an adblock tab

 

[shadowfaX]

Originally posted by: boran
he could have used comet cursor

my opinion of bad sites are the ones made by script kiddies, they see a nice javascript they add it to their site, flashing moving text, tails or clocks around yer cursor, etc...

that and fancy color schemes together makes for one bad site, but I'm sure every one of us has encountred em.

oh man, comet cursor... what memories from the past, hehe. my friends used to make websites with that all the time, and my poor computer didn't like it.

 

[Maetryx]

About Vanity Sites for some information about bad vanity web sites. The two links at the bottom of the page are funny.

 

[Abhoth]

Oh that's funny... gaddland is really good!

 

[gorcorps]

The grey/black/blue color combination looks cool and it's the only thing saving it from utter crap. It's not the worst, but it may be the most annoying. Every dam link I have to sit through some BS title screens for flash and whatnot. O well, some people try to hard then fail miserably.