Don’t Force Readers Into a Technology
I had a recent conversation with Vivien over the annoyances of going to a website where a reader is forced into a particular technology. A real life example is Netflix, which requires me to use Internet Explorer to use its “Watch Now” service. Another real life example is a corporate Intranet, which would require users to browse at a common resolution to get the “most functionality” out of the design.
Here’s a quick tip: If you have to post a “how-to” on navigating a particular site, you probably didn’t design it very well. Listed below are some more tips on how to avoid forcing readers into a particular technology when it comes to a website design.
Test on Multiple Browsers
One program that I found extremely useful in testing is called Multiple IEs. As a result, I was able to test the new RA Project design in Internet Explorer 5.5, 6, and 7. I also tested the design in Firefox and Opera to ensure that the design was quite functional in either browser.
If I were to say to the users of this site, “You must only use IE”, I would be alienating about 79% of our users. About 72% of RA Project users use Firefox, 3% Opera, and 3% Safari.
When designing your own site, at least test on Firefox, Internet Explorer 6, and Internet Explorer 7. It aggravates me to no end when I go to a site that says, “Must be viewed in (insert browser name here).”
Don’t Rely on Plugin Technology
Don’t rest a big part of a site’s design on third-party plugins such as Flash, Quicktime, or even operating systems as in the case of the BBC iPlayer.
One time a person asked me to critique their design. I went to their site, which had an intro-screen (don’t get me started). Within this intro-screen was a link to a text-only version of the site, and also another link to a flash introduction. When I clicked on the flash-introduction, a new window was opened, the screen was maximized (and the toolbar turned off), and the entire screen was black.
I told this person, “What’s going on? First, you force me into a new window. Then you turn off my toolbar? And where is the content?” The person replies, “Well, you need Flash 8.”
I replied, “Well, if the user has anything less than Flash 8, they’ll get this blank screen like I just did.” To which my friend replied, “If users don’t have Flash 8 by now, they deserve to get stuck on a blank page.”
The moral of the story? Don’t assume that users should have a technology. Some corporate and/or government computers don’t have Flash installed for security/bandwidth purposes.
Don’t Force Readers Into a Resolution
This same person I mentioned earlier had a different site. When I clicked on the links, they would pop-up and automatically be resized to 1024×768. The only problem with that approach was I was using a monitor at 800×600 resolution. Guess where the close-button was? I wasn’t able to find it. 
What about a novice user who has no idea how to close a window using keyboard shortcuts? Never, ever force a user into a resolution like that. It would be far better to have horizontal scrolling in this case than to have a window much bigger than the user’s screen resolution.
Conclusion
It is never a good idea to force a reader into a technology. The three things I mentioned were browsers, plugins, and screen resolutions. Do you have any other examples of being forced into a technology?
Andrew says...
Ronald, I wrote a first impressions post yesterday about the BBC iPlayer. The BBC’s 7 day catch up player. This requires not only IE, but also Windows Media Player, and it only works on Windows XP.
There are very good reasons for this but a lot of people are annoyed about anyway.
I totally agree about messing with the frame on websites. Resizing the browser is just arrogance especially now that all the main browsers have tabs.
Thankfully no professional web designer would make a flash splash any more, but there are a lot of other people in the world making websites who do.
I could go on at length about all the things that should never happen (table based layouts anyone?) and that I see on a daily basis but I’ll give everyone else a chance.
Ronald Huereca says...
Andrew,
Thanks for the post reference. I hope you don’t mind, but I edited the post to include your link. Offline perhaps I’ll show you the site I’m referencing.
Table-based layouts are annoying, but not as annoying as ‘99 era developers who never graduated beyond FrontPage.
Andrew says...
You are so right Ronald, perhaps a lot of the problems stem from a lack of education amongst the general population. Do we need an industry body to educate consumers and business owners / decision makers?
Ronald Huereca says...
Andrew,
Seems the Brits have it more together when it comes to standards and such. I can tell you from personal experience that the U.S. seems to care more about 508 Compliance than web and accessibility guidelines (WCAG, W3C anyone?).
A lot more work has yet to be done, and yes, an industry body would help, but it would take much more than that. An international body with UN-type power would be necessary to give the “motivation” and push towards modernization and standards. Guidelines simply aren’t good enough.
Andrew says...
“Seems the Brits have it more together when it comes to standards and such.”
I would love to agree with you Ronald but the evidence I see only a daily basis doesn’t support that. There are some high profile Brits that support standards, but on the whole I still think most don’t consider standards, accessibility or usability.
Ronald Huereca says...
Andrew,
Well I suppose perception is worse than reality. I subscribe to Paul Boag’s podcast, as well as read Practical Web Design (.net in the UK). You’ll find nothing like that here in the US.
A lot of web-standard conferences and such are only in the UK. It’s hard to find one in the US not in major cities like New York and San Francisco. I got excited when there was going to be a conference in Birmingham (about an hour away from me) when I found out that the UK also had a Birmingham.
Oh well I suppose.