Click here to return to IRED.com
Navigation Tabs


Mortgage Lenders Tools for Agents Consumer Services Ratings and Icons Descriptions USA Realty Directory International Realty Directory Add or Enhance a Link in the IRED Directories Advertising on IRED Information about IRED Site Map

Attitude & News Home

Directories
  Int'l Realty
  US Realty




WEB BIZ
Real Makeover
By Dave Nienberg, Project Manager, 4 Guys Web Design Group

Copyright © 1997 Dave Nienberg. All rights Reserved


The Old Site
Let's take a look at the old site and discuss what works and what doesn't.

Please note: all the links to the old site now take you to a pdf view (you'll need Adobe Acrobat Reader) of the site. Unfortunately the original files have been eliminated

The Good - Yvette's old site had only one good feature which made it into the redesigned site - the information request. It still surprises me how effective these forms can be. People seem to like structure. By guiding them with the information you need, you can dramatically increase the number of people who contact you. Unfortunately, in the nine months that Yvette's old site was up, she only received one request. The reason for this is simple. People didn't trust her because they didn't trust her site.

The Bad - There was plenty of bad in the old site so I won't cover everything in detail - just the three worst offenders.

Animation explosion - I admit I like animations on Web sites (I know the guy who figured out how to do them) but only when they're done correctly. Animation will not make a bad site better or fix any other flaws you might have. In fact, more often than not, it'll make your site worse. Yvette's old page had no less than six animated elements all fighting for your attention. This is five - and maybe six - too many. Your Web site is an extension of your image and the image projected here is one of disorganization and clutter. I wouldn't contact her to help me with the biggest financial transaction of my life - would you?

Chartjunk - This requires a little background so you can fully understand what I'm talking about. Chartjunk is a term coined by Edward R. Tufte, a Yale professor and the worlds leading expert on user interface design. As stated by Mr. Tufte, chartjunk is all the elements (scrollbars, horizontal rules, bullets, etc) which take up space but convey no information. As you can see there is plenty of chartjunk on the old design. Notice the worst offender - the scrollbar on the left which cuts the page up and draws too much attention to itself. Is it necessary? No, of course it isn't. This is simply poor design. Take a look at your site. What is taking up room and not conveying information? Eliminate it and your site will become cleaner and easier to use.

Poor graphics - Graphics are great. They made the World Wide Web what it is today. Unfortunately, graphics are like matches in the hands of children when they're not used properly. This site definitely got burned. Three deadly sins of graphics are present here.

First, the dreaded aliasing problem. Take a look at the multicolored balls describing services. Notice how they are all ragged around the outside instead of smoothly blending in. That is aliasing. They should be removed entirely. Try to picture what the site looks like without them. It looks a lot better doesn't it?

The second deadly sin is the cartoon graphics. Don't get me wrong. I love cartoons. But I abhor them on a professional site (unless, of course, they are of high-quality which these are not). They are simply inappropriate for the image Yvette was trying to project. What do you think of the graphics used here? How do they make you feel about Yvette?

The third and last deadly sin is the file size of the images. Quite simply this page takes too long to download. Most of the people who find her site are going to leave very quickly because they don't have time to waste. If you're courteous to your visitors by keeping your graphics small and relevant, you'll increase the chance they'll become your customers.

The Ugly - Once again, there is plenty of ugly on the old site. Let's talk about two of ugliest "features." First, the price. This site was done for free by the company which hosted the old site. As you can see, you get what you pay for! The problem is - Yvette was paying $250 a quarter for hosting the site and she didn't even have her own domain. This was way too high. The second ugly feature is the "Frame - No Frame" versions. Whenever you see this in action you know the site is poorly designed. Frames can be used well so there is never a reason to have two "different" sites with the same information. If someone tries to talk you into this "feature" run away screaming as fast as you can. They don't know what they're doing.

Previous Page | Next Page


| IRED Home | Search IRED |


© 1995-2008 IRED.Com, Inc
All Rights Reserved