3 ms·

> make the link point to a page that says "Sorry, we're still working on [feature X]. Check back soon!" and avoid looking like an amateur? You've officially mi

> make the link point to a page that says "Sorry, we're still working on [feature X]. Check back soon!" and avoid looking like an amateur? You've officially missed the point of the article. The argument is not that you look like an amateur, but that the user thinks the problem is with their computer or ISP. Since most 404's are due to user error in URI entry, web filters or cross-site link rot, this is a reasonable assumption on the part of the user, an assumption that can be readily exploited.

dandelany 18y ago
I got that, I just don't necessarily agree with it. IMHO, if you've got a web app that users are savvy enough to know that they need, especially one that costs money, 9 times out of 10 they're going to be savvy enough to know that getting a 404 page with your branding on it is your company's problem, not theirs. I know this because I work for a company that provides an enterprise B2B web app, and customers already consistently blame the stuff that ISN'T our problem (connection, filters, ancient browser, javascript turned off, etc.) on us. And yes, a lot of 404's are due to improper URI entry and "cross-site link rot"... but isn't that a completely moot point since we're talking about internal links?
- breck 18y ago
  Okay. I've only seen this done with major consumer websites with high traffic. For B2B sites, I think you are right. Your solution would probably work better.
nostrademons 18y ago
Maybe I've just got more tech-savvy friends than most, but I don't know anyone who assumes a 404 when following an internal link is their fault. Usually they just assume that the webmaster was sloppy. Why not use a 503 Service Unavailable? This is telling (stretching ;-)) the truth, and people do assume that a 503 is temporary, because that's the explicit point of the message. And you can throw in an e-mail link, like someone suggesed, if they want to be notified when the service is "back up". Or I suppose you could use 501 Not Implemented if you really want to be honest, but that's boring. ;-)
- ajkirwin 18y ago
  Usually when I see a 503, I think, "Great. The site is f-ing broken/overloaded/down" again. A 404.. I find, not so much.
- simplegeek 18y ago
  Why not simply be honest and tell them "Hey, we intend to introduce these features and testing few ideas. So far, 445 people have expressed their interests, including you. Thank you for your interest and time. You can enter your email below (this is optional)and we will let you know as soon as this is available. Thanks again." Two birds in one shot :)
litewulf 18y ago
I think there is something stunningly wrong with assuming your users are idiots.

dandelany 18y ago

I got that, I just don't necessarily agree with it. IMHO, if you've got a web app that users are savvy enough to know that they need, especially one that costs money, 9 times out of 10 they're going to be savvy enough to know that getting a 404 page with your branding on it is your company's problem, not theirs. I know this because I work for a company that provides an enterprise B2B web app, and customers already consistently blame the stuff that ISN'T our problem (connection, filters, ancient browser, javascript turned off, etc.) on us. And yes, a lot of 404's are due to improper URI entry and "cross-site link rot"... but isn't that a completely moot point since we're talking about internal links?

breck 18y ago
Okay. I've only seen this done with major consumer websites with high traffic. For B2B sites, I think you are right. Your solution would probably work better.

nostrademons 18y ago

Maybe I've just got more tech-savvy friends than most, but I don't know anyone who assumes a 404 when following an internal link is their fault. Usually they just assume that the webmaster was sloppy. Why not use a 503 Service Unavailable? This is telling (stretching ;-)) the truth, and people do assume that a 503 is temporary, because that's the explicit point of the message. And you can throw in an e-mail link, like someone suggesed, if they want to be notified when the service is "back up". Or I suppose you could use 501 Not Implemented if you really want to be honest, but that's boring. ;-)

ajkirwin 18y ago
Usually when I see a 503, I think, "Great. The site is f-ing broken/overloaded/down" again. A 404.. I find, not so much.
simplegeek 18y ago
Why not simply be honest and tell them "Hey, we intend to introduce these features and testing few ideas. So far, 445 people have expressed their interests, including you. Thank you for your interest and time. You can enter your email below (this is optional)and we will let you know as soon as this is available. Thanks again." Two birds in one shot :)

litewulf 18y ago

I think there is something stunningly wrong with assuming your users are idiots.