The 8 Dying Trends In Website Design To Stay Away From

Share

dying_website_design_trends-510826-edited

When redesigning your website, it’s important to create a digital storefront that is, above all, usable and appealing to your ideal customer.

It’s tempting to think that “usable” and “appealing” mean the same things as “flashy” and “trendy.” But in the world of website design, that couldn’t be farther from the case. While we’re not championing the design of  “classic” websites like Havenworks.com or LingsCars.com, we are in favor of creating websites that use clean designs and effective strategies to attract the right traffic, convert that traffic into leads, and help nurture those leads into customers.

bad_web_design

With that in mind, here are 8 dying trends in website design to stay away from when considering your next site redesign:

Recommended for YouWebcast: Online Equity Fundraising – Everything You Need to Know

1. Autoplay videos and music

Unless your site is Pandora or Spotify and your user is already logged into their station of choice, automatically playing music when a visitor loads your site isn’t “classy” or “hip” – it’s a nuisance to your user. Having playback or volume controls readily available is helpful, but do your visitors a favor and don’t make them have to frantically hunt down the “turn off music” buttons when they load your site in the middle of a meeting.

The same goes for videos: autoplaying videos (that includes the GIF-like loops some sites are embedding in their headers) can be hugely distracting for users and make it less likely they’ll enjoy spending time on your site and want to come back again.

2. Mobile-only sites

“Mobile optimization” is more than just a buzzword in web design: thanks to recent updates to Google’s search algorithms, optimizing sites to be highly usable on mobile platforms is a necessity. However, creating an entirely separate site means, well, you’ve created an entirely separate website that you’re now responsible for optimizing, updating, maintaining, debugging, and supporting. Not only that, mobile-only sites can also cause search engine optimization issues with duplicate content and beyond. Instead of creating a separate site entirely, smart web developers and designers would be wise invest a little additional time up front to make their existing site responsive.

3. Overusing parallax

While parallax scrolling used to be a novel website feature, today, it can seem like every other site you visit has some parallax feature to be found.
sony_parallax

While parallax can look nice when used sparingly, a study published in the Journal of Usability Studies that compared sample parallax scrolling (PS) and no parallax scrolling (no-PS) sites found “With respect to perceived usability, enjoyment, satisfaction, and visual appeal, there were no differences between the PS website and the no-PS website.” The journal went on to report “…two of the participants in the study sufferedfrom motion sickness and because of that reduced their ratings of usability of the PS website. Consequently UX practitioners planning to work with PS should consider this issue and how it may affect their test participants.”

4. Modals

Modals that require user action before page content can be accessed can be the bane of an Internet user’s existence.

modals

Kyle Geiste, Experience Designer at HubSpot Academy, shares our frustration: “The thing [I hate is] when you go to a webpage and it throws a modal at you … and your choices are “I WANT A MILLION DOLLARS” or “I HATE MONEY.”” Kyle continues: “The pop up is bad enough. The weird mind game they try to play is just wrong… insulting your user’s intelligence [by expecting them to click where you want] is never a good idea — people are much smarter than that.”

We couldn’t have said it better ourselves, Kyle.

5. Splash pages

“I love splash pages and flash intros that force me to read tangentially related content before I get to the page I want!”

…Said no one, ever.

splash_pages_dying_website_design

While splash pages can be a great way for a website to force you to look at something or collect your email address, they’re pretty terrible for the users (aka your potential visits, leads, and customers) themselves. Don’t even get us started popups or splash pages that exist solely to display a third-party advertisement or to solicit for Facebook likes and Twitter followers.

6. Using Flash

Ok, maybe Flash isn’t entirely going the way of the dinosaurs, but the shift many public and private organizations are making towards using “open” platforms means that platforms like Flash, which aren’t compatible with mobile devices, will likely continue to decrease in popularity.

Not only is Flash content all but ignored by Google, creating Flash content can be time consuming – and have we mentioned it won’t work on mobile? With more than 1.2 billion people accessing the web from mobile devices, creating a website – be it an intro video, page element, or otherwise – they can’t access is worth mentioning again (and again, and again).

7. Image sliders

Image sliders, also known as image carousels, are on their way out as a website design trend – and for good reason.

Sliders, or carousels, tend to get ignored because people assume they are ads, they can go too fast or too slow for people, can sometimes distract from content, and most importantly can actually decrease conversion rates instead of increasing them.

If you’re not tied to the idea of an image slider, there are a few alternatives to consider. For example:

  • Show a single static message or offer in text, accompanied by static image(s).
  • Show a single static call-to-action alongside some text, possibly accompanied by a static image.
  • Show a main message, offer, or CTA where the slider is, then show secondary messages, offers, or CTAs in static featured areas below it.

Still thinking of using a slider? Here’s some more food for thought.

8. Showing off

The concept of “if it’s not broken, don’t fix it” can be applied to many things – from home renovations, to cooking, to web design. Kyle Geiste of HubSpot agrees: “Honestly, the biggest problem is people designing to show off their skills rather than focusing on the basics. If a user understands that X symbol does Y thing in 99% of interfaces, then don’t try to reinvent the wheel. It works. It’s proven to work.”

What are your biggest pet peeves when it comes to website design trends? Let us know in the comments section below.

Special thanks to Kyle Geiste and Amanda Singleton for their insights in this article.

Digital & Social Articles on Business 2 Community

Share

Alas, poor Snapchat, I knew thee well – The unicorns are dying, according to Owler

Share

snapchat-common-stock

Owler, a tracking company that offers a service it calls competitive intelligence, is stepping out of its comfort zone of monitoring companies in similar industries, and, quite frankly, veering away from the entire concept of intelligence, with a new report that claims to look into the future to predict which unicorns are going to fail.

Surprisingly, the company’s morbidly titled “Dead Unicorn Study” is not a work of Brony fan fiction but a breakdown of the privately held companies worth $ 1 billion — those who have achieved every kid’s dream of reaching unicorn status — that are most likely to bite the dust in the future.

Here’s a quick summary of their prognostications: At some point, all these companies will be toe up, horn in the ground.

The companies findings, which it actually decided to share with others, predicts that the unicorns most likely to fail are: GrabTaxi, Theranos, CloudFlare, Lookout, Lazada, Snapchat, Powa, Houzz, Didi Dache, and Magic Leap. Owler ordered the list from least likely to unicorn to fail to most likely. So, Magic Leap, you are really screwed.

Owler’s list isn’t completely unscientific. The list was generated by ranking each unicorn based on key metrics like revenue per employee, revenue against funding, valuation against funding, and total acquisition spend.

But the company wasn’t just satisfied with guessing which ten $ 1 billion private companies are going to go into the crapper first. It also decided that Snapchat, which has raised more than $ 800 million, stands out among the other companies on its list of hypothetical dead mythical creatures. In fact, Owler estimates that Snapchat’s time on this earth is only about a year and a half.

Wow! These guys are good.

The reasons Owler states for Snapchat being close to life support are that the company has… wait for it… a high spend-to-revenue ratio (as if you couldn’t say the same thing about countless other startups), and is dependent on what it calls an “incredibly fickle youth-oriented market” which has not allowed the company to expand its user base. Mind you, Snapchat has a user base of more than 100 million.

In the press release proclaiming the company’s gift of magical foresight, Owler chief executive Jim Fowler says of Snapchat’s incredible growth, “Such virality is capricious, and shows the company is at risk. Therefore, of any on Unicorn, Snapchat is the most likely to go under — and in a timeline of 15 to 20 months.”

The only thing I can say about Fowler’s statement is that it is quite impressive how he was able to use the word ‘capricious’ in the same sentence as ‘virality’ with such adroitness.

In a world where JustFab, Square, and Jawbone live in the lofty realms of the unicorn, Snapchat, which has convinced investors to take common stock, something VCs rarely if ever do, is not only smart enough to keep on growing, but has positioned itself for an exit of massive proportions.

[illustration by Brad Jonas]

PandoDaily

Share