[Web4lib] Nielsen's Top 10 - 2005 version

[Erik Kraft]

Most of the items on Nielsen's list are no-brainers, but I don't think 
frozen layouts and fixed page widths are a usability "mistake" at all. 
In fact, I think the reason you cite for using liquid layouts--that many 
entry-level machines now come standard with hi-res monitors--is an 
argument for, not against, fixed width layouts. There is now a huge 
disparity between the lowest possible resolution we have to design for 
(800 x 600) and the highest (2000 or more pixels wide). In most cases, I 
think liquid layouts that look great at 800x600 look awful on a super 
hi-res monitor, and vice-versa.

Of course the usability argument is that the user should be in control 
of the size of their browser window's content area, but I'm slightly 
dubious that the average user on a high-res monitors surfs the web with 
a less-than-maximized browser window. Readability is a huge part of 
usability, and this involves being able to reliably control white space 
and line lengths on pages. I don't think Nielsen gets this, at all. (Not 
that I wish to start a long debate about aspects of design that Nielsen 
doesn't get--that could preoccupy the list for a very long time indeed!)

I know there are pros and cons both ways, and that a good case can be 
made for liquid layouts, and that different kinds of pages call for 
different layouts, but to call a fixed width design an outright 
"mistake" gets my back up a bit.

Cheers,

Erik.

Erik.

Thomas Dowling wrote:

> I didn't see this posted yet.  Jakob Nielsen has written up his 2005 
> version of the "Top Ten Web Design Mistakes" at 
> <http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html>.  This version is 
> largely derived from comments his readers provided.
>
> Longtime Web4Libbers will recall that earlier versions of this list 
> have done a lot to arm usability-minded librarians against Kewl 
> Deeziners their institutions may have accidentally put in charge of 
> the web site.
>
> The current list:
>
>  Legibility - including bad fonts (too much Verdana everywhere, IMO),
>    and small/frozen font sizes
>  Non-standard links - make it obvious what's a link, don't use
>    Javascript for links, etc.
>  Flash - "...at the main Flash developer conference, almost everybody
>    agreed that past excesses should be abandoned and that Flash's
>    future was in providing useful user interfaces"
>  Content that's not written for the web
>  Bad search - "search is a fundamental component...and is getting
>    more important every year"
>  Browser incompatibility - due to increasing non-ubiquity of IE
>  Cumbersome forms - too many, too long, unneeded questions, etc.
>  Lack of contact info
>  Frozen layouts/fixed page widths - too narrow for hi-res displays
>    and/or too wide for printing
>  Inadequate photo enlargement - "click to enlarge" leads to images
>    that aren't enlarged enough, especially for hi-res displays
>
> There's a note that, just based on reader response, the last item 
> would have been an anti-popup item, but that's been covered many times 
> already.
>
> Just IMO, a lot of the page design errors here become obvious when you 
> get a hi-res monitor (i.e. what a current basic system comes with) and 
> a browser that can enforce a minimum font size friendly to middle-aged 
> eyes.
>


-- 
Erik Kraft
Visiting Assistant Reference Librarian for Digital Resources
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
ekraft at uiuc.edu / 217.244.3770