What an amazing idea! tillymoss.com sells beautiful hand-made fabric sleeve covers to protect your MacBook. Gorgeous, classy & original. And the site by AP is pretty cute too

Take a look at tillymoss.com here.

What an amazing idea! tillymoss.com sells beautiful hand-made fabric sleeve covers to protect your MacBook. Gorgeous, classy & original. And the site by AP is pretty cute too

Take a look at tillymoss.com here.

It’s bad enough when forms are over-long and boring, but when a web form is actually completely unusable, frustration is an understatement.

This example of a web form by Churchill (whoops, actual link is https://churchillpet.com/ but beware, the secure certificate is out of date!) shows us the worst example of poor web standards and testing procedures. The form is so confusing and mind-boggling, it is actually impossible to finish it. Take a look at the check boxes to answer the all-important criteria questions:

Now without looking at the source code, is there any way to be absolutely sure whether you are selecting yes or no? Most visitors would be confused.

Admittedly, this was in Firefox. I haven’t checked but I am sure it works fine in IE6 but that is hardly the point - Churchill are one of the big insurance providers and should be considerate about usability and standards. 10% of the market is alot to lose.

I got my new pet insurance elsewhere.

It’s bad enough when forms are over-long and boring, but when a web form is actually completely unusable, frustration is an understatement.

This example of a web form by Churchill (whoops, actual link is https://churchillpet.com/ but beware, the secure certificate is out of date!) shows us the worst example of poor web standards and testing procedures. The form is so confusing and mind-boggling, it is actually impossible to finish it. Take a look at the check boxes to answer the all-important criteria questions:

Now without looking at the source code, is there any way to be absolutely sure whether you are selecting yes or no? Most visitors would be confused.

Admittedly, this was in Firefox. I haven’t checked but I am sure it works fine in IE6 but that is hardly the point - Churchill are one of the big insurance providers and should be considerate about usability and standards. 10% of the market is alot to lose.

I got my new pet insurance elsewhere.

Even when all applications were minimized, this crazy page went on for miles and miles. Surely people can’t actually use any of these applications?

I am a big fan of Facebook, and of the open API (I have 5 applications installed myself) - some of the apps are great, but really, with the wondrous “How fat are you?”, “Which swear word are you?” and “Poo fight” installations, are we really using the internet to its full potential?

Even when all applications were minimized, this crazy page went on for miles and miles. Surely people can’t actually use any of these applications?

I am a big fan of Facebook, and of the open API (I have 5 applications installed myself) - some of the apps are great, but really, with the wondrous “How fat are you?”, “Which swear word are you?” and “Poo fight” installations, are we really using the internet to its full potential?

iBBC? BBC Homepage? MyBBC? MYBEEB?

Who knows but the new personalised, customisable BBC homepage looks interesting. Very chunky, very user-friendly, very AJAX packed and very clean.

However, as Rico asked, why fix it to 1024? Surely the Beeb out of any website should cater for all, including the 800 x 600 users?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/home/beta/

iBBC? BBC Homepage? MyBBC? MYBEEB?

Who knows but the new personalised, customisable BBC homepage looks interesting. Very chunky, very user-friendly, very AJAX packed and very clean.

However, as Rico asked, why fix it to 1024? Surely the Beeb out of any website should cater for all, including the 800 x 600 users?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/home/beta/