You are currently browsing the archives for the Bad Link category.
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Oct | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
8. September 2009 by Jennifer.
this is a bad example of harmony between technology and audience need because the design is overly complicated. There are a great deal of links that make it difficult for the user to decide how to use the website. Also, there is not much in regards to design that make it more appealing to he audience
Posted in Bad Link 2 | 1 Comment »
8. September 2009 by Matthew.
*I hate using this site
*very difficult to find certain things
*you can start or register a student org, but its hard to find the page to edit your existing student org page
Posted in Bad Link 2 | 1 Comment »
8. September 2009 by Anne-Marie.
The website that I chose for a bad link is http://www.northsidebankandtrust.com/. I use this website a lot because I bank with Northside Bank, however their website is horrible. It takes forever to load initially, and then once you get to the site its hard to find what your looking for. Once you find what your looking for its hard to find your way back.
Posted in Bad Link 1 | No Comments »
8. September 2009 by Hannah.
I chose http://thetoke.com as my bad link for its lack of harmony between technology and audience need. The website itself is pretty cool, and his layouts are interesting. But it takes some time to figure out what things are, how to get to them, how to get back, etc. There are almost too many viewing choices, without any of them offering a clean, simple, interface that an internet newbie would be able to handle. He took full advantage of the technology at hand, however he may have left some members of his audience behind.
Posted in Bad Link 2 | 1 Comment »
8. September 2009 by Anthony.
http://www.msy.com.au/everything is centered and thrown in the middle ..everything is a link ..different size and color … i dont even know what this site is forneed i say more…
Posted in Bad Link 2 | 1 Comment »
8. September 2009 by Michelle.
http://zara.com/Even if the design of the website is very well done and matches well with whatever clothes you are browsing through; (if you click on casual clothing, the background already looks grungier compared to the regular women’s collection) I picked this website as a bad link because it is very confusing.-To look at collection you need to step by step look trough ALL of the clothes, there are no categories such as: tops, bottoms, dresses etc that way you can’t directly access what you are looking for.-It lacks information.-Confusing tabs, for example there is one that just says “inspiration”, which then leads to “color”, “volume” and “texture”…but what does that mean? And clicking on the link doesn’t clarify anything, I just get more confused.I never got to find out if I could purchase an outfit online or not; there seems to be no link or any kind of information if one can shop online at this site or just browse.I thought that one of the main reasons, why a clothing store has a website is so that their customers could shop online, but this does not seem to be the case here.
Posted in Bad Link 2, Bad Link | 1 Comment »
8. September 2009 by Michael.
For my bad link I chose www.factmonster.com. I chose this website because it seems like it is based more towards children and the overall design is very cluttered and focused on the center of the page. Also there is that annoying space up at the top that is solely for video advertisements which are always annoying. Some of the navigation doesn’t really make sense overall, the categories seem very random and not organized. Let alone the buttons or square that is used for the navigation seems very sloppy. How is cool stuff going to help you find anything? It is just random and broad. The functionality doesn’t seem like its all there. I mean after you click on a category and it goes to another page the navigation gets a little bit better and focused on the right. But then when you click on a category it takes you too a pretty long list of sub categories that for most viewers will just give up because they don’t want to sift through all the crap.
Posted in Bad Link 2 | 1 Comment »
8. September 2009 by Zachary.
http://www.incredibox.fr/
This is my bad link even though this is a pretty neat website, it just doesn’t get straight to the point. It lists the certain things you can do but not the exact percussion, etc. If you play along with it you will understand what I’m saying, but once you get it all going it ends up being pretty funny. But for the topics sake this is a bad website for the audience’s needs.
Posted in Bad Link 2 | No Comments »
8. September 2009 by Haley.
Flying Concrete is an American who has lived and worked in Mexico for half of his career. A potter who has branched into architecture, his work is perhaps not in line with Calatrava, but I think it’s awesome! He uses a readily available material to create inexpensive yet thoroughly unique, customizable architectural elements and buildings. In addition to being inexpensive, they’re fairly efficient and, word has it, sustainable. One would imagine that his clientele would be avant garde, with intermediate knowledge of design and, surmisably, some solid experience with technology. Maybe those are pretty quick, broad generalizations but I don’t think they’re far off the mark. Anyway, this artist/architect’s website is NOT a reflection of anything avant garde, design concious or technologically advanced… the javascript menu is clumsy, not to mention a little difficult to see and the menu font is significantly smaller than the text of the main body text, diminishing the importance of navigating … (which sort of makes the menu pointless…) This is an example of a website that is NOT harmonious with technology and the needs/desires of its target audience.
Posted in Bad Link 2 | 2 Comments »
5. September 2009 by Emily.
http://www.trainweb.com/This site is completely overloaded for what it advertises itself to be; “Information portal for train travel, model railroading, railfans and railroad industry.” What it looks like is a giant page of detailed flashy ads with a few links that are indistinguishable from the general mess.
Posted in Bad Link 2, Bad Link | No Comments »
3. September 2009 by admin.
The following URLS have substantial browser prohibitive use cases. This serves as demonstration that beside the fight over XHTML standards, the infamous browser wars continue to exist. Most of the conflicts occur because the designers and developers elect to support technology supported by a narrow set of web browsers. Others are simply clumsy oversights by the designer or developer.
I pulled this list from a forum topic on Maclife:http://www.maclife.com/forums/topic/112689
Posted in Bad Link | No Comments »
1. September 2009 by Emily.
· This site does not respond to anything but the user’s click on a link. It is not interactive and is a pretty boring site for the user to navigate.
· This site is really, really ugly. There is nothing extravagant about the design of this site. Also some of the images on this site are at such a low resolution that the readability is almost gone.
· There is a lot of information on this site, but I am not sure it is organized very well. Sometimes when you click on a link it opens a new tab and sometimes it does not. This makes the navigation of the site a little messy in my opinion, and can be especially confusing if the user wants to go back and can’t remember which window was opened by clicking on a link or not.
Posted in Bad Link 1 | 1 Comment »
1. September 2009 by Ryan.
http://www.benstevens.co.uk/<br />Good: legibile, navigable, informative<br /><br />http://www.valdelomar.com/inicio.phpBad: too artsy, non-intuitive navigation, crazy visual noise
Posted in Bad Link 1, Good Link 1 | 1 Comment »
1. September 2009 by Michelle.
http://www.jenniferlovestherobot.com/
Posted in Bad Link 1 | 1 Comment »
1. September 2009 by Haley.
I am Always Hungry: portfolio website, highly interactive, great design
Aaron’s Stats 261 Page: no interactivity. EVERYTHING is spit out onto one page. the definition of no interactivity….
Posted in Bad Link 1, Good Link 1 | 1 Comment »
1. September 2009 by Matthew.
Not interactive/BAD
Interactive/GOOD
http://www.specialdefects.com/v2/
* you control the actions going on in the website
* if you click more or move more you can control speed
Posted in Bad Link 1, Good Link 1 | 1 Comment »
1. September 2009 by Anthony.
http://istanbul.tc/mahir/mahir/needless to say this site is horrible .. it is there is no interaction at all .. just creepy pictures of some guy wishing he was borat
Posted in Bad Link 1 | No Comments »