2 ms·
>> ... a long scroll of 20 ... blocks and titles none of which mean anything on their own > frankly, it has a terrible UX I don't follow these critiques. The
by networkimprov 6y ago
>> ... a long scroll of 20 ... blocks and titles none of which mean anything on their own
> frankly, it has a terrible UX
I don't follow these critiques. The content and navigation of the site is quite clear to me. The trackpad/wheel scrolling stutters very slightly in FireFox on Windows.
EDIT: And hey, it's in Dark Mode!
- epse 6y agoI opened this site on mobile. The blocks are half as high as the titles, making them impossible to read. Clicking a block took me through soms slow animation, which always ended with some graphic growing into view, in the same colour as the text, overlapping with the first paragraph of text...
- networkimprov 6y agoIt seems the site omitted one... #21: More people will visit your site with tiny/mobile screens than large/desktop ones.
- II2II 6y agoThe problem that I ran into was the lack of clear visual cues that you are supposed to scroll, which is why I was referring to everything as slides. I simply clicked on the things that it looked like you were supposed to click on. If you approach the site in that way, you miss out on virtually all of the content. In a way, I should know better. I landed on a news article earlier in the day that started with one of those dynamic infographics that you interact with through scrolling. I was at the point of backing out of the page, concluding that the article was the infographic, when a hint of an actual article popped up on the screen. While it is a visually, I also find it a very annoying waste of time when I am trying to find information. (Incidentally, I didn't run into the performance issues that others have been mentioning even though I was using an 8 year old computer.)