Web 2.0 problems
First, let's deconstruct the way this post title was chosen.
I went to Google Battle and tested some alternate titles, and the
number of times each phrase was searched on Google was as follows:
Web 2.0 errors: 92 M
Web 2.0 mistakes: 23 M
Web 2.0 sucks: 1.6 M
Web 2.0 problems: 155 M
top Web 2.0 problems: 113 M
most common Web 2.0 problems: 23 M
Thus, the winner was "Web 2.0 problems", according to Google Battle.
Now, here are the worst Web 2.0 annoyances I have encountered in my
relentless quest to find well coded, relevant, valuable interactivity
tools and social networking communities. I alpha/beta test many sites
as I seek new platforms for clients and for personal purposes.
Top Web 2.0 Problems:
(1) broken functionalities
Example: click on Submit or Sign Up at Instructables, nothing happens.
(2) missing functionalities
Example: you can't delete uploaded mp3s from Podsafe Music Networks.
(3) no, or insufficient, FAQ, Help, Getting Started Tips, or User
Guide
Many times you're expected to just know intuitively how to work the
site, how to accomplish basic tasks. Often, I have to navigate the
site in convoluted manner to get to the functionality I seek.
(4) no clickable sidebar badges
A powerful, effective way to promote a new site or tool is to freely
advertise it on your blog. A great way to do that is by adding a
graphic link button, or clickable badge, to your blog's sidebar. But
many companies fail to provide the HTML code, or even a right
clickable logo, for us to make into a clickable badge.
(5) no Feedback form/sluggish response to user input
New sites in particular stand to benefit from large amounts of
critique from early adaptors. But they often make it a pain to provide
this free expertise. When you email the support team, your input is
either ignored or it takes a long time to hear back from the company.
This negligence is contrary to the principles of Web 2.0, which is
supposed to be more participatory and interactive than Web 1.0
(6) CEO/Lead Developer is on Twitter, Jaiku, etc. but fail to provide
link to their page
While they may talk about being on Twitter, Jaiku, and other social
networks, good luck trying to find their page. Often they're using not
their actual name but a nickname or avatar handle like "code prowler",
"Fitz", or "Frivmo". Smart ones will use their real name or company
name. like "Mobasoft" or "Fuel My Blog", to facilitate finding their
Twitter page.
[EDIT UPDATE: I did not mean to slam those, including me, who use
non-anonymous aliases, nicknames, pseudonyms. I use "vaspers" for darn
near everything, but I always reveal my real name in a Profile or
About page: Steven E. Streight (don't forget the E.).
I just meant that using your company name is a bit better in some
cases, as in Fuel My Blog. Robert Scoble uses the name of his blog
"Scobleizer" like I use "Vaspers".
You must determine what works best for your branding, memorability,
etc.]
(7) insufficient input choices
Example: on Facebook, when you add a Contact or Friend or whatever the
hell they call it, a panel appears, asking you "how do you know this
person?"
But there possible answers provided are leaning toward casual
friendships, school, and romantic entanglements, making it like the
MySpace toilet. There is no "met via blogging" or "on another social
networking site". So you have to select "met randomly", then a text
entry box pops up, so you can explain what you mean.
(8) no invites to distribute to your friends
Amazingly, some Web 2.0 sites fail to provide you with any method for
inviting your friends, family, or colleagues to join. Freebase commits
this error. Spock gives you 5 invites by default, but I asked for 30
more, explained who I was and who my colleagues are, and I got 50
invites. That was very cool.
(9) no info on your personal URL, or a long, hard to remember URL
I love how my URL at Twitter is twitter.com/vaspers and at Jaiku, it's
vaspers.jaiku.com, but at some sites, you are given a complicated URL
string that's hard to recall. They say it's for security, but why
should there be a security problem with people simply visiting your
page? I thought access to your profile and site files was protected by
your email addy, username, and password.
Some sites don't even display any "your personal [tool/community] URL"
info.
(10) dysfunctional sign up, register, login, installer, or upgrade
Popfly has a broken login. I could not even get past the sign up
process. I had a valid invitation key, but the site kept rejecting my
email and password. Horrible coding.
Joost installer will not work.
Skype upgrade generates a "corrupted file" error message.
FOREGONE CONCLUSION:
All these problems, annoyances, and headaches could be avoided by
running user observation tests on 4 to 8 typical users.
Instead, they slap the crappy "Beta" label on it. Beta means screw the
users. Beta means mediocre, "don't worry, be crappy" garbage. Beta
means they're too lazy, stupid, or cheap to do code testing and
usability analysis on their products.
Posted by steven edward streight at 6/03/2007 10:35:00 PM 7 comments
Links to this post
Labels: bad coding, usability, user observation tests, Web 2.0
Vaspers Rock You slide show
In my quest to sign up for as many Web 2.0 tools and social networking
sites as humanly possible, investigating them to learn new interfaces
No comments:
Post a Comment