There are obviously a wealth of terrible websites out there, but to be honest the worst consequence of <blink>-ing text and animated GIFs is slight eye strain for the user.
This image shows the ballot papers used in some parts of Florida in 2000, with which there are a few usability problems.
Pat Buchanan received an inordinately large number of votes, while Al Gore received many fewer than expected in areas where this design was adopted (comparing official results to polls). Many have theorised that this is because Democratic voters saw Gore second from the top of the candidate list, and naturally went to punch the marking area second from the top of the page, mistakenly choosing Buchanan.
To make the problem worse, there is a strong black line running across the top of Al Gore's box, pointing exactly at Buchanan's marking area; a strong visual cue that some voters might have followed rather than the arrow to the side of Gore's name.
Compare this to George W. Bush's area. His name is top of the ballot, and his marking area is top of the ballot. Also, his marking area is sandwiched between an extremely heavy black line on one side, and an arrow on the other.
Combine this with the abnormally high number of spoiled papers due to multi-page ballots with each leaf marked "Vote on all pages", as well as the difficulties the Votomatic machines had in fully punching the ballots, and you have a handful of poor usability choices which changed the course of the most powerful nation on earth.
Office 应用程序之间的不一致。 （例如）为什么我无法将在 Word 中创建的方程移动到 Power Point 并且仍然可以对其进行编辑？
办公室圆形按钮。 实际上是程序员的好人误以为这只是一个装饰元素。
Microsoft has a few to name
The horrible mess that is MSN hotmail. This interface is so convulted and unintuitive. It seems that the developers thought that as long as the user can select a color scheme out of 8 ugly ones they're ok.
Isn't Lotus Notes one usability disaster from end to end? At least as an email program (which was add-on functionality for what might otherwise be a semi-decent group work system - think old-style Wiki with workflow).
Apple Boot Camp 向导在任何步骤中都没有可用的取消按钮，您要么重新分区驱动器，要么终止应用程序。
Apple Boot Camp 向导
Lotus Notes 一般情况。
Windows Vista 关机按钮 - 您永远不知道它的用途（睡眠、休眠、关机或执行 Macarena），因此您无论如何都会使用微小的下拉菜单。
问题中提到的 Outlook 内联自动完成功能未链接到通讯簿或 GAL，并且如果重置用户配置文件，该功能将会丢失。 用户往往会自动依赖该缓存，而没有意识到它的高度不稳定。
When websites only work with certain browsers but not Internet Explorer, just out of principle.
I've seen some business applications requiring Flash for displaying a simple table, though that's not really a usability problem I guess.
The Apple Boot camp wizard that has no working cancel buttons in any of the steps, you're stuck with either repartitioning your drive or killing the application.
Lotus Notes in general.
Windows Vista shutdown button - you never know what it's set to do (sleep, hibernate, shut down or do the macarena) so you'll use the tiny drop-out menu instead anyway.
The Outlook inline auto-complete mentioned in the question that's not linked to the address book or GAL and will be lost if the user profile is reset. Users tend to automatically depend on that cache without realizing it's highly volatile.
The plain old 'hit return to accept default' in a dialog box must be one of the most common source of disasters (though the default is supposed to be safe, it isn't always).
The Risks Digest is also a good source of usability mistakes as well as more general risks.
In December 1989 in Montreal, a crazy shooter started shooting people at l’École Polytechnique de Montréal (Engineering School). It was later shown that the police intervention was delayed because 911 needed the exact adress of the building (couldn't find it by his name). 14 students were killed that day.
Air France's Airbus A320 crashed on January 20th, 1992. The same button was used for 2 differents functions (speed and angle of descent). 87 people died.
Example with less consequences :
Dragging a disk to the trash to eject it on a Macintosh
I suppose it's not a disaster as such, but my personal peeve is the sort of error dialog box you'll find in most OSes...e.g. "Unable to write to disk, data may have been lost"...and then a single button saying "OK". No it's not OK!!!
如果您正在寻找可用性灾难，只需在 google 上搜索“共享软件”或“免费软件”，或者 download.com 上的任何内容即可。 可悲的是，但事实是，99.9%的内容看起来像是一个双手被绑在背后的盲人设计的。
If you're looking for usability disasters, just google for "shareware" or "freeware", or anything on download.com. Sad but true, 99.9% of it looks like is was designed by a blind man with both hands tied behind his back.
Donald Norman's book The Design of Everyday Things - is one of the classics in this field. Many, many excellent examples of bad usability design can be found in this book.
Should be required reading in all HCI and Usability courses.
I think the automobile "Unintended Acceleration" issues of the 1980's was a usability disaster. Without a overly obvious separation between gas and brake pedal, and a safety interlock preventing switching from Park unless brake is applied, it was way to easy to misapply the accelerator and run into someone or something. The Audi-5000 took most of the blame for this, but it really applies to all vehicles. The car companies, their lawyers, and many pro-business wonks were unsympathetic and blamed the drivers. But just like the John Denver example posted earlier, an error-prone interface that does not take into account human nature and ends up killing people, is a usability disaster. A minor re-engineering of the interface solved the problem. Today, all cars have a shift safety interlock, and the brake pedal is shaped differently and sits much higher than the accelerator.
Not nearly as disastrous as some of these examples... I have a blog focused on the analysis and constructive criticism of web and desktop application usability.
JCL on the mainframe is a usability disaster. Although it was good for it's time when programmers were cheep and computing time was expensive times have changed and JCL hasn't kept up do to backward compatibility.
Not a disaster, but it could have been. The Apollo 10 lunar lander span out of control because both astronauts had flicked a guidance switch that only one of them should have. In the words of astronaut John Young in the excellent documentary In the Shadow of the Moon:
"Computer systems should be
user-friendly. When you make a
mistake it shouldn't kill you."
my example is stackoverflow search features which doesn't display the number of results at the top of the page : you have to scroll down to see the number of pages before knowing if you need to refine your search or not
Nokia E61 (and many other models I guess, but this is what I have).
There are MANY places and context when there's an obvious action to be taken, and instead of offering the option, a message pops up telling you where you should go to do it (some times that involves going 3 levels down in the menu hierarchy).
I can remember two right now:
A connection link wasn't properly closed, when you try to browse the web a message says (approx.): "there is an open connection, go to connectivity, connections management, active data connections and choose disconnect".
When choosing a wireless network, you choose for the first time a password protected one, instead of prompting for the password it says something like: "go to connectivity, connections management, available WLAN, and create a new access point".
That completely sucks. If the GUI designers had that options in mind, why they didn't just offered the option of doing the reasonable task in place instead of prompting those stupid messages?
There's still another one... one would think that the appropriate place for the file browser is the "tools" menu, but nope, it's under "office".
It has quite a collection of different sites which are lack usability and a good user experience in one way or another with sites ranging from IRS to Dell, and everything in between. Some of the main problems that I mention are difficulties finding content, poor layout, confusing menus and poor menu layout and design.
I hope this will help you have a good idea of some broken sites and what to avoid. I'm writing a new article on sites that do most things right now as well, and I'll be sure to link to that at the time so you have some good ideas of sites that actually work and do what they should.
发布评论
评论（30）
显然，那里有大量糟糕的网站，但说实话，
-ing 文本和动画 GIF 最糟糕的后果是对用户造成轻微的眼睛疲劳。艾伦·布莱克威尔最喜欢的糟糕设计导致大规模失败的例子之一是2000 年棕榈滩选举惨败。
此图显示了 2000 年佛罗里达州部分地区使用的选票，其中存在一些可用性问题。
在采用这种设计的领域，帕特·布坎南获得了异常多的选票，而阿尔·戈尔获得的选票远少于预期（将官方结果与民意调查进行比较）。 许多人推测这是因为民主党选民看到候选人名单上倒数第二的戈尔，自然而然地去打了倒数第二的标记区域，错误地选择了布坎南。
更糟糕的是，阿尔·戈尔的禁区顶部有一条粗黑线，正好指向布坎南的盯防区域； 这是一些选民可能会遵循的强烈视觉提示，而不是戈尔名字旁边的箭头。
将此与乔治·W·布什的地区进行比较。 他的名字位于选票的顶部，他的标记区域位于选票的顶部。 此外，他的标记区域一侧是一条极粗的黑线，另一侧是一个箭头。
再加上由于多页选票每页都标有“在所有页面上投票”而导致的损坏论文数量异常高，以及 Votomatic 机器已经完全进行了投票，并且您有一些可用性较差的选择，这些选择改变了最强大的进程地球上的国家。
There are obviously a wealth of terrible websites out there, but to be honest the worst consequence of
<blink>-ing text and animated GIFs is slight eye strain for the user.One of Alan Blackwell's favourite examples of bad design causing large-scale failure is the 2000 Palm Beach election debacle.
This image shows the ballot papers used in some parts of Florida in 2000, with which there are a few usability problems.
Pat Buchanan received an inordinately large number of votes, while Al Gore received many fewer than expected in areas where this design was adopted (comparing official results to polls). Many have theorised that this is because Democratic voters saw Gore second from the top of the candidate list, and naturally went to punch the marking area second from the top of the page, mistakenly choosing Buchanan.
To make the problem worse, there is a strong black line running across the top of Al Gore's box, pointing exactly at Buchanan's marking area; a strong visual cue that some voters might have followed rather than the arrow to the side of Gore's name.
Compare this to George W. Bush's area. His name is top of the ballot, and his marking area is top of the ballot. Also, his marking area is sandwiched between an extremely heavy black line on one side, and an arrow on the other.
Combine this with the abnormally high number of spoiled papers due to multi-page ballots with each leaf marked "Vote on all pages", as well as the difficulties the Votomatic machines had in fully punching the ballots, and you have a handful of poor usability choices which changed the course of the most powerful nation on earth.
我所知道的最糟糕的恐怖故事是导致患者死亡的 Therac 放射治疗设备。 还提供案例研究。
一些文章提到用户界面的复杂性是一个影响因素。
The worst horror story I know is the Therac radiation therapy device that killed patients. The case study is available as well.
Some articles have mentioned the complexity of the user interface as a contributing factor.
微软有几个例子：
Microsoft has a few to name
Lotus Notes 难道不是一场从始至终的可用性灾难吗？ 至少作为一个电子邮件程序（它是一个附加功能，否则可能是一个半不错的小组工作系统 - 想想带有工作流程的旧式维基）。
Isn't Lotus Notes one usability disaster from end to end? At least as an email program (which was add-on functionality for what might otherwise be a semi-decent group work system - think old-style Wiki with workflow).
当网站仅适用于某些浏览器而不适用于 Internet Explorer 时，这是不符合原则的。
当
我见过一些业务应用程序需要 Flash 来显示一个简单的表格，尽管我猜这并不是真正的可用性问题。
我见过一些业务应用程序需要 Flash
Apple Boot Camp 向导在任何步骤中都没有可用的取消按钮，您要么重新分区驱动器，要么终止应用程序。
Apple Boot Camp 向导
Lotus Notes 一般情况。
Windows Vista 关机按钮 - 您永远不知道它的用途（睡眠、休眠、关机或执行 Macarena），因此您无论如何都会使用微小的下拉菜单。
问题中提到的 Outlook 内联自动完成功能未链接到通讯簿或 GAL，并且如果重置用户配置文件，该功能将会丢失。 用户往往会自动依赖该缓存，而没有意识到它的高度不稳定。
When websites only work with certain browsers but not Internet Explorer, just out of principle.
I've seen some business applications requiring Flash for displaying a simple table, though that's not really a usability problem I guess.
The Apple Boot camp wizard that has no working cancel buttons in any of the steps, you're stuck with either repartitioning your drive or killing the application.
Lotus Notes in general.
Windows Vista shutdown button - you never know what it's set to do (sleep, hibernate, shut down or do the macarena) so you'll use the tiny drop-out menu instead anyway.
The Outlook inline auto-complete mentioned in the question that's not linked to the address book or GAL and will be lost if the user profile is reset. Users tend to automatically depend on that cache without realizing it's highly volatile.
对话框中简单的“点击返回以接受默认值”必定是最常见的灾难源之一（尽管默认值应该是安全的，但事实并非总是如此）。
风险摘要也是可用性错误以及更一般风险的良好来源。
The plain old 'hit return to accept default' in a dialog box must be one of the most common source of disasters (though the default is supposed to be safe, it isn't always).
The Risks Digest is also a good source of usability mistakes as well as more general risks.
在这种情况下，值得一提的是“Interface Hall of Shame”...虽然有点老了，但确实很有趣！
The "Interface Hall of Shame" is worth mentioning in this context... It's a bit old, but certainly interesting!
几个例子（并非全部与计算机相关）：
1989 年 12 月，蒙特利尔，一名疯狂的枪手开始向蒙特利尔理工学院（工程学院）的人员开枪。 后来证明，警方的干预被推迟了，因为 911 需要该建筑物的确切地址（无法通过他的名字找到它）。 那天有 14 名学生被杀。
法航的空客 A320 于 1992 年 1 月 20 日坠毁。同一个按钮用于 2 个不同的功能（速度和下降角度）。 87 人死亡。
后果较少的示例：
A few examples (not all computer related) :
In December 1989 in Montreal, a crazy shooter started shooting people at l’École Polytechnique de Montréal (Engineering School). It was later shown that the police intervention was delayed because 911 needed the exact adress of the building (couldn't find it by his name). 14 students were killed that day.
Air France's Airbus A320 crashed on January 20th, 1992. The same button was used for 2 differents functions (speed and angle of descent). 87 people died.
Example with less consequences :
我想这并不是一场灾难，但我个人最讨厌的是大多数操作系统中都会出现的错误对话框......例如“无法写入磁盘，数据可能已丢失 “......然后一个按钮说“确定”。 不，这不行！！！
I suppose it's not a disaster as such, but my personal peeve is the sort of error dialog box you'll find in most OSes...e.g. "Unable to write to disk, data may have been lost"...and then a single button saying "OK". No it's not OK!!!
Nielsen 的优先考虑 Web 可用性中列出了大量可用性灾难，其中包括一些已经提到过。
There is a huge list of usability disasters in Nielsen's Prioritizing Web Usability, including some that have already been mentioned.
将文件拖放到 Windows 中的任务栏项目上（当您想要在当前最小化的应用程序中打开文件时）。
微软预计用户可能想要这样做，并添加了错误消息来解释它不起作用。
Dropping of a file onto taskbar item in Windows (when you want to open file in application that is currently minimized).
Microsoft anticipated that users may want to do this and... added error message explaining that it won't work.
如果您正在寻找可用性灾难，只需在 google 上搜索“共享软件”或“免费软件”，或者 download.com 上的任何内容即可。 可悲的是，但事实是，99.9%的内容看起来像是一个双手被绑在背后的盲人设计的。
If you're looking for usability disasters, just google for "shareware" or "freeware", or anything on download.com. Sad but true, 99.9% of it looks like is was designed by a blind man with both hands tied behind his back.
MS Office 2007 中的新“功能区”UI。
The new "Ribbon" UI in MS Office 2007.
表格已重置。 :-)
Form's reset. :-)
唐纳德·诺曼的书《日常事物的设计》是该领域的经典著作之一。 在本书中可以找到很多很多糟糕的可用性设计的优秀例子。
所有 HCI 和可用性课程均应作为必读内容。
干杯，
-理查德
（亚马逊链接：http://www.amazon.com/Design-日常事物-唐纳德-诺曼/dp/0385267746）
Donald Norman's book The Design of Everyday Things - is one of the classics in this field. Many, many excellent examples of bad usability design can be found in this book.
Should be required reading in all HCI and Usability courses.
Cheers,
-Richard
(amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/Design-Everyday-Things-Donald-Norman/dp/0385267746 )
任何需要用户按住 1 秒以上才能执行操作的按钮。
我和我的老板确信他的烤箱和微波炉上的定时器一旦启动就无法取消； 按“取消”没有任何效果。
有一天我偶然发现你必须按住取消键 3 秒钟。
Any button that requires the user to hold it for more than 1 second for it to take action.
My boss and I were convinced that the timer on both his oven and his microwave could not be canceled once started; pressing Cancel had no effect.
I discovered by accident one day that you have to press and hold cancel for 3 seconds.
我认为 20 世纪 80 年代的汽车“意外加速”问题是一场可用性灾难。 油门踏板和制动踏板之间没有明显的分离，也没有安全联锁装置，除非踩刹车，否则无法从驻车档切换，否则很容易误踩油门并撞上某人或某物。 Audi-5000 对此承担了大部分责任，但它确实适用于所有车辆。 汽车公司、他们的律师和许多亲商人士都没有同情心，并指责司机。 但就像之前发布的约翰·丹佛的例子一样，一个容易出错的界面，不考虑人性，最终会害死人，是一场可用性灾难。 对界面进行小的重新设计解决了这个问题。 如今，所有汽车都配备了换档安全联锁装置，制动踏板的形状也有所不同，并且位置比油门高得多。
I think the automobile "Unintended Acceleration" issues of the 1980's was a usability disaster. Without a overly obvious separation between gas and brake pedal, and a safety interlock preventing switching from Park unless brake is applied, it was way to easy to misapply the accelerator and run into someone or something. The Audi-5000 took most of the blame for this, but it really applies to all vehicles. The car companies, their lawyers, and many pro-business wonks were unsympathetic and blamed the drivers. But just like the John Denver example posted earlier, an error-prone interface that does not take into account human nature and ends up killing people, is a usability disaster. A minor re-engineering of the interface solved the problem. Today, all cars have a shift safety interlock, and the brake pedal is shaped differently and sits much higher than the accelerator.
Joel 不久前已经在他的博客上发布了，但值得一提Windows 中的关闭、睡眠、休眠、挂起
来自从事此工作的人：
http://moishelettvin.blogspot.com/2006/11/windows- shutdown-crapfest.html
Joel already posted it on his blog a while back, but worth mentioning shutdown vs. sleep vs. hibernate vs. suspend in windows
From someone who worked on it:
http://moishelettvin.blogspot.com/2006/11/windows-shutdown-crapfest.html
只要我们不将自己限制在计算机 UI 上，那么 杀死 John Denver 的可用性缺陷怎么样？ ？
As long as we're not restricting ourselves to computer UI, how about the usability flaw that killed John Denver?
并不像其中一些例子那么灾难性……我有一个博客专注于对网络和桌面应用程序可用性的分析和建设性批评。
http://www.allaboutbalance.com/
罗布
Not nearly as disastrous as some of these examples... I have a blog focused on the analysis and constructive criticism of web and desktop application usability.
http://www.allaboutbalance.com/
Rob
坚持使用 javascript 的网站，哦等等......
我最近遇到的最糟糕的应用程序必须是 scribus，这很遗憾，因为我需要做它所做的事情。
sites that insist on javascript, oh wait..
worst app I've come across recently has to be scribus, which is a shame because I need to do what it does.
我想乔尔不久前就有了这个 - 但很多人都思考过它......用于打开手机的红色关闭按钮。
Joel had this one I think a while ago - but many people have pondered it... The red off button to turn ON the cell phone.
大型机上的 JCL 是一场可用性灾难。 虽然这对于当时程序员廉价且计算时间昂贵的时代来说是件好事，但时代已经改变，JCL 没有跟上向后兼容性。
JCL on the mainframe is a usability disaster. Although it was good for it's time when programmers were cheep and computing time was expensive times have changed and JCL hasn't kept up do to backward compatibility.
这不是一场灾难，但也有可能是一场灾难。 阿波罗 10 号 月球着陆器由于两名宇航员的弹射而失控只有其中一个应该有的引导开关。 用宇航员约翰·杨在优秀纪录片中的话来说在月球的阴影下：
Not a disaster, but it could have been. The Apollo 10 lunar lander span out of control because both astronauts had flicked a guidance switch that only one of them should have. In the words of astronaut John Young in the excellent documentary In the Shadow of the Moon:
汽车不仅需要两只手，还需要一只脚来操作。
我确信，在过去 100 年的创新中，我们可以想出一些比这更好的东西。
Cars need not only two hands but also a foot to operate.
I'm sure that in the past 100 years of innovation, we could've come up with something better than that.
我的例子是 stackoverflow 搜索功能，它不会在页面顶部显示结果数量：您必须向下滚动才能查看页面数量，然后才能知道是否需要优化搜索
my example is stackoverflow search features which doesn't display the number of results at the top of the page : you have to scroll down to see the number of pages before knowing if you need to refine your search or not
诺基亚 E61 （我猜还有许多其他型号，但这就是我拥有的）。
当需要采取明显的操作时，有很多地方和上下文，而不是提供选项，而是弹出一条消息，告诉您应该去哪里执行此操作（有时需要在菜单层次结构中向下移动 3 级）。
我现在记得两个：
那完全糟透了。 如果 GUI 设计者考虑到了这些选项，为什么他们不直接提供执行合理任务的选项，而不是提示那些愚蠢的消息呢？
还有另一种...人们会认为文件浏览器的合适位置是“工具”菜单，但不，它在“办公室”下。
Nokia E61 (and many other models I guess, but this is what I have).
There are MANY places and context when there's an obvious action to be taken, and instead of offering the option, a message pops up telling you where you should go to do it (some times that involves going 3 levels down in the menu hierarchy).
I can remember two right now:
That completely sucks. If the GUI designers had that options in mind, why they didn't just offered the option of doing the reasonable task in place instead of prompting those stupid messages?
There's still another one... one would think that the appropriate place for the file browser is the "tools" menu, but nope, it's under "office".
我最近写了一篇关于这个主题的文章：9 个用户体验和可用性陷阱，以及如何避免它们。 您可以在 http://www.1stwebdesigner.com 查看/development/usability-ux-pitfalls-howto-avoid/。
它有相当多不同的网站，这些网站在某种程度上缺乏可用性和良好的用户体验，从国税局到戴尔，以及介于两者之间的所有网站。 我提到的一些主要问题是难以找到内容、布局不佳、菜单混乱以及菜单布局和设计不佳。
我希望这能帮助您了解一些损坏的网站以及应该避免的内容。 我正在写一篇关于现在也能做大部分事情的网站的新文章，我一定会在那时链接到该文章，以便您对实际工作并做他们应该做的事情的网站有一些好主意。
I recently wrote an article on this very topic: 9 UX and Usability pitfalls, and how to avoid them. You can check it out at http://www.1stwebdesigner.com/development/usability-ux-pitfalls-howto-avoid/.
It has quite a collection of different sites which are lack usability and a good user experience in one way or another with sites ranging from IRS to Dell, and everything in between. Some of the main problems that I mention are difficulties finding content, poor layout, confusing menus and poor menu layout and design.
I hope this will help you have a good idea of some broken sites and what to avoid. I'm writing a new article on sites that do most things right now as well, and I'll be sure to link to that at the time so you have some good ideas of sites that actually work and do what they should.
（来自Microsoft 为 Windows XP 对话框提供更好的“广告真实性”。）
(From Microsoft Offers Better "Truth in Advertising" for Windows XP Dialog Box.)
我最喜欢的常见可用性问题是变灰菜单选项。
为什么它是灰色的？ 荒谬的。
My favorite common usability pet peeve is the Grayed Out Menu Option.
Why is it grayed out? Ridiculous.