The "Make it (Worse) For Mobile" anti-pattern
-
Well the site I set up has this...
So...
96.9k
I could see it being a little over that, but that's a LOT of libraries to get it to 200k.
Or they're not minified. Which... they might actually not be minified.
-
Oh no, they're minified. Just... JESUS CHRIST THAT'S A LOT OF LIBRARIES.
EDIT: No, only some of them are minified.
It failed badly on speed, and the nice contact-us header is bad UX according to google :)
-
I disagree with PageSpeed Insights, just because it gives this page a 100% for user experience:
That page is actively trying to defeat password managers.
-
E_NO_REPRO
<a
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
Applax Scrolling
Go to this page with JavaScript disabled:
You'll have to get rid of
state-invisible
from one of the elements, but the page entirely works without JavaScript, and I'm pretty sure it has several cases of what you call "Applax Scrolling".Is this "Applax Scrolling"?
-
Is this "Applax Scrolling"?
No. Applax Scrolling is parallax scrolling, but only done because Apple did it for some version of iOS.
If you scroll the foreground 10em, the background image scrolls 9em. Or some dumb ratio.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
If you scroll the foreground 10em, the background image scrolls 9em.
which sounds nice in theory and does give an illusion of 3d.
in practice it eats up way too much processor power and leads to motion sickness.
another example of "just because apple did it does not make it a good idea."
-
Oh, you mean like this?
Yeah, static background is a lot better on the eyes than background-that-moves-at-the-wrong-speed.
-
Oh, you mean like this?
MURDER IT WITH PLASMA!!!!!!!
...
yes. Yes, exactly like that. Except usually done in js so it's even jerkier and more disorientating.
Yeah, static background is a lot better on the eyes than background-that-moves-at-the-wrong-speed.
Or a plain background that scrolls like normal-- or a solid color background so scrolling isn't even an issue. A background is there to provide contrast with the foreground-- and that is it's ONLY purpose. In fact, let me codify that:
Lorne's Eighth Law of Web Design
A background's only purpose is to provide contrast to the foreground. If it doesn't provide contrast, it is now the foreground, and you have failed.Corollary 1:
If the background is providing required information, it is now the foreground, and you have failed.Corollary 2:
If the background stands out or grabs attention due to any special-fancy effect of any kind, it is now the foreground, and you have failed.
-
@Lorne_Kates said:
disorientating
-
I have made websites like this. Not by choice, of course, only when the budget was so low that purchasing and modifying a template was all they could afford. This site is pretty standard in that regard, just a reskin of some pre-packaged template from ThemeForest or something.
Agencies love making shit like this, I'll never know why though. 1% of the time the theme is perfect and you hardly have to do anything to it. That's bad, how can you even call yourself a web designer/developer/agency/anything if you just change images on a template? The other 99% of the time you're stuck because the theme gets you about half way to where you need to be, but is so strict or terribly written that modifying it at all would take more hours than the client can afford so you end up doing the project at a loss. That is obviously bad.
I wish people would stop wanting websites.
-
Restaurant's website. I've outlined the only scrollable part of the page in red. Note how the stuff outside the red box is static and the actual things that I'd like to see (i.e. the menu) are stuffed into a tiny scrolling box.
Desktop (which isn't great either):
and mobile:
-
This is a sign that your design has failed:
-
Restaurant website? At least it wasn't just a link to a 12MB pdf.
-
Vegan-friendly alcohol? What, do other brands of apple cider contain live bees?
Most likely not, but animal products are used to filter and finish wine sometimes: