How many serious problems can you find with the following site?

[greyleonard]

I think this site, as with the others sold by OrderEze, are truly terrible: www.princeumberto.com (http://www.princeumberto.com) .
You can see the same mistakes made repeatedly on their other sites here (http://www.ordereze.com/OurClients.aspx) at their "satisfied customers" page.

I'll start off by noting what happens if javascript is disabled in the user's browser (like mine, until I allow it per site in the NoScript extension):

"Your browser does not support scripting which will negatively impact your experience on our website.
Please download and install the latest version of Internet Explorer from Microsoft at the website below.
Get Internet Explorer (http://www.microsoft.com/ie/)"

:hit:


If you enjoy picking on lousy web designs, please join in.




(http://www.ordereze.com/OurClients.aspx)

[Worm]

From a quick look :

A lot of this is based on my own personal preference - but c'est la vie.

Flash 'intro' page? - ick.
Flash 'titles' for no apparent reason - ick.
Patterned background? - ick.
Different versions of the menu system in different places in different orders - ick.

[RayG]

Their customer pages all have the same look to them. Image across the top of the page, text below. Every page. The Stepford Wives of webpages....

Their flash page graphics looked very sluggish, but the no-flash page loaded quickly.

I didn't think they were ugly pages, just no variety.

If you're looking for really sucky webpages, go here (http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/).

RayG

[greyleonard]

Yep, I echo your "icks", Worm. :)

RayG, I've seen that web pages that suck page before - it's a keeper. I honestly think the ordereze sites aren't too far behind (or ahead, rather). The uniformity you mention really ticks me off, knowing that they convince people to pay over 5000 dollars for a site plus at least 50 dollars a month for hosting. The flashinees of their sites appeals to some people who don't know better, I suppose.

[ddt]

Flash 'intro' page? - ick.
And music to add to the annoyance. I don't want music when I'm browsing and I don't expect it. Flash is a no-no for me as long as those bastards at Adobe refuse to make a Linux 64-bit version :).


Flash 'titles' for no apparent reason - ick.
You can use the non-flash version. What ticked me off is that I got a horizontal scrollbar in the non-flash version - only because the menu is too wide for my approx. 800 pixel wide window.


Different versions of the menu system in different places in different orders - ick.
Didn't see that. But what's with these menu items 'Gift' and 'Baskets'?

[richardm]

And music to add to the annoyance.

You can say that again. There's nothing worse than having a sneaky browse and having the office suddenly fill with music. :boxedin:

[Giraffe107]

You think that's bad:

http://yvettesbridalformal.com/index.htm

Who needs graphic design when you have MS Paint?

[Wowbagger]

90% of each page's load time is for only about 5% of its content.

These guys might be relatively nice artists. But, their web development priorities scream rank-amateur!

[Worm]

You can use the non-flash version.

True - however, the non-flash version doesn't really seem to be significantly different to the Flash version - what's the point?

This strikes me as a business run by someone who has been on some sort of Web Design course, learnt how to use Flash and set up a basic online store, and decided to do exactly the same development job for every single customer.

And is clearly in love with Flash. Uses it for everything. Need a menu? Flash. WHY!!!??!?!!?!?

</rant>

[Wowbagger]

Most of his customers are in the restaurant business. I suppose there are some in the restaurant business who don't know enough about web development, to know how problematic their web sites are.

[greyleonard]

Giraffe107, holycrap! Did you find that listed at some Top 10 Sucky Websites page? Unbelievably low quality there. It's nice to get ones kids involved in things, but jaysus.

-
Wowbagger & Worm, yeah, the company has some sort of deal with Sysco Foods (restaurant supplier) and Sysco reps do a lot of the selling. They have a somewhat captive audience when they're talking to restaurant owners and "offer to pay a large portion" of the overpriced website costs. In my experience, most restaurant owners don't have the time to spend on the internet that would result in them becoming savvy to what constitutes a user-friendly, quality design and coding. Like a colorful infant's mobile spinning over a crib, the Flash elements delight & entice them, I suppose.

[greyleonard]

I might as well supply the backstory here.
Last week, I got a call from an OrderEze rep saying that I needed to transfer one of my client's domains to them because OrderEze was taking over the site. I asked who he spoke to, and he gave my client's first name, but didn't know his last name offhand.
I said, "well, clientname will have to call me to do that".
In the meantime, I was hoping to gather some impartial opinions about OrderEze sites to share with the client.
Anyway, the client called me last night, I spoke with him for about 20 minutes, and now he's trying to see if he can get out of the contract he signed and get his downpayment back. We'll see.

[wahrheit]

The uniformity you mention really ticks me off, knowing that they convince people to pay over 5000 dollars for a site plus at least 50 dollars a month for hosting.

$50 a month for hosting a web-site that gets around 2 visits a year? They are ripping off their clients. And $5000 for their crappy all-look-the-same template sites is a shame, too.

Should one of their clients ask for my advice, I'd suggest to not pay a dime for that idiotic "Can't watch our site, download IE" alone. That's backyard web-design terminology from the mid 90's.

[dudalb]

There are a number of websites that are devoted to bad websites. Just type "Bad Websites" into a search engine.
Yeah, the one above is pretty bad but compared to some of the ones I have seen on the "Bad Websites" sites it a freaking masterpiece.