7 ms·

There is no fold

57 points by hownottowrite 12y ago

hammerbrostime 12y ago
Then I must be blind or delusional, based on what I've witnessed during usability tests. I highly doubt we'd see the same breakdown for new users vs. return users. IE, return-users know they can scroll, new-users don't have that knowledge.
- notatoad 12y ago
  Are you designing a fold into your pages? If you design around viewport height and position:fix things to the bottom of the screen, then there absolutely is a fold and users will be biased to things above the fold. If your content clearly doesn't end at the bottom of a page, users are perfectly capable of and willing to scroll down to find the rest of the content.
  - hammerbrostime 12y ago
    This is primarily an issue I've seen with my students' work. They haven't always internalized the issues with folds, and the need to design around them to make sure that there appears to be a continuous flow of content. Saying something like "There is no fold" is not going to help students recognize the issue.
ebbv 12y ago
This is true and it isn't true. It depends on context. What content are you placing? Who needs to see it? What kind of mentality will they be in when they're looking for it? In a rush or browsing? All of these factors will determine what kind of placement is optimal. If you're talking about an info box with a CTA in it, maybe it doesn't need to be near the top of the page or viewable on initial load. But if you're a service based company, and you're talking about a support link, having it anywhere other than prominently displayed immediately on page load is going to aggravate your customers. In that case there is definitely "a fold." The fact that there's 4k different devices viewing your page doesn't change the fact that their browser window has a bottom, it just means that the location of that bottom is volatile. If you really care, your page design can be responsive to not just the width of the browser window but the height as well. Abusing the concept of a fold is lazy and ignorant. It shouldn't be treated like the only aspect of web browsing that matters. But at the same time, ignoring the fact that some of your content will be immediately viewable to users upon loading the page and other content won't, is also lazy and ignorant.
scott_s 12y ago
Please label your axes. The units are not obvious. I think the x-axis is pixels, where 0 is the top of the viewable part of the browser, and increases downward, but it took me a long time to figure that out. (My initial guess was milliseconds into a page view, but that makes no sense since I assume the y-axis on the second graph is seconds into engagement.)
Animats 12y ago
Sounds like a justification for that horrible Wordpress theme with small blocks of text in a huge font, alternating with images that scroll at a different rate than the text.
- api 12y ago
  "horrible Wordpress theme" Just Wordpress? I think you're describing every web site designed since 2008 there.
- sparkzilla 12y ago
  Those are called "parallax" themes.
devindotcom 12y ago
The concept of the fold is a valuable and flexible one, to be interpreted within the context of the page or platform on which it is supposed to exist. Organizing and prioritizing presentation of data relies on recognizing certain patterns of display and activity, and the fold is wrapped up in that. Why try to deny the existence of a well-known and useful term and construct rather than help redefine it, the way we've done with other terms dating from the relatively distant past? (edit:sp)
- protonfish 12y ago
  "The fold" is where a newspaper folds in half. Unless your users are folding their computers in half, it really has no place in digital screen design. I agree that the closer to the top of a document you place something, the more prominence it has, but this has nothing at all to do with a "fold."
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    In digital content, "the fold" has its own meaning (which is, certainly, inspired by the literal fold in newspaper.) This is one of many digital design that are inspired by terms from print, like "page" (which also is inappropriate for digital if you take the print meaning literally.) And, anyway, laptop users do fold their computers in half, but that's a completely different thing.
    - e12e 12y ago
      > In digital content, "the fold" has its own meaning Does it? I suppose it could mean "outside the first screen", as in on the next "card" in a mobile "slide deck", or "below the scroll" in a browser (that is: content that is on the virtual page, but outside the viewport). But my impression is that people are not using it like that -- in which case "the fold" is probably a poor/wrong metaphor/term? > This is one of many digital design that are inspired by terms from print, like "page" (which also is inappropriate for digital if you take the print meaning literally.) Not really. In (magazine/newspaper) print, a page typically holds various assorted content. Especially so for the front page. Now, with scrolling, "page" will often mean "all of a document at a given URL" -- and that would typically be different from a print page. In that case "viewport" would be more appropriate. But I think the confusion really lies in the print world: "page" means both "what the user can see at any one time" (viewport) and "largest section of connected layout" (the physical page). > And, anyway, laptop users do fold their computers in half, but that's a completely different thing. But mobile users did, at least for a while. There were/are some phones with a small screen on the back of the "flip". AFAIK all of these only have enough real-estate for a small icon and simple scrolling text message though. And aren't really meant for showing a preview of some random web page, but rather to alert the user to incomming email etc.
chuckcode 12y ago
Darn it, the internet just broke advertising again...
torkable 12y ago
Came expecting interesting FP article, leave disappointed.
sparkzilla 12y ago
This is great research, and confirms to me that readers are not put off by long pages, and are actively looking to scroll for information.
- timme 12y ago
  If a 4 word claim with a few overstyled charts qualifies as research then we're doomed anyways.
ronilan 12y ago
Twitter should take note of Tumblr usage here.
ztnewman 12y ago
Why on earth would you post this as a series of tweets.. and then embed them in a tumblr post.. without any additional commentary..
- rscott 12y ago
  Sadly, because tweetstorms are getting more and more popular. I think it gives people a superiority feeling ("aha, look at how much brilliance I can convey in so few characters!"), whereas the reader is just frustrated.
- theandrewbailey 12y ago
  This article needs more words. A series of graphs alone that seem to contradict the title doesn't convey useful information.
- acjohnson55 12y ago
  100% this! I'm seeing more and more tweets that are entire pages of text in JPEG format. I can't really say it's a failed medium, because obviously Twitter has massive usage, but it doesn't really seem like progress.
smacktoward 12y ago
It's not so much that there is no fold as that there are a zillion folds. Where the content of a page rolls down off the bottom of the screen depends on so many things: display size, resolution, browser window size, browser chrome, add-ons, toolbars, etc. etc. etc... So I always find it a bit amusing to hear people talk in the Web context about "above the fold." Oh, that goes above the fold? OK, which one?
- brokentone 12y ago
  So "there is no _single_ fold" perhaps makes the most sense?
Kiro 12y ago
I may be stupid but I don't understand the graphs. What are the axes?
JStanton617 12y ago
This is 100% ripped off from http://blog.chartbeat.com/2013/08/12/scroll-behavior-across-the-web/ http://blog.chartbeat.com/2013/08/12/scroll-behavior-across-...

57 points by hownottowrite 12y ago

Then I must be blind or delusional, based on what I've witnessed during usability tests. I highly doubt we'd see the same breakdown for new users vs. return users. IE, return-users know they can scroll, new-users don't have that knowledge.

notatoad 12y ago
Are you designing a fold into your pages? If you design around viewport height and position:fix things to the bottom of the screen, then there absolutely is a fold and users will be biased to things above the fold. If your content clearly doesn't end at the bottom of a page, users are perfectly capable of and willing to scroll down to find the rest of the content.
- hammerbrostime 12y ago
  This is primarily an issue I've seen with my students' work. They haven't always internalized the issues with folds, and the need to design around them to make sure that there appears to be a continuous flow of content. Saying something like "There is no fold" is not going to help students recognize the issue.

ebbv 12y ago

This is true and it isn't true. It depends on context. What content are you placing? Who needs to see it? What kind of mentality will they be in when they're looking for it? In a rush or browsing? All of these factors will determine what kind of placement is optimal. If you're talking about an info box with a CTA in it, maybe it doesn't need to be near the top of the page or viewable on initial load. But if you're a service based company, and you're talking about a support link, having it anywhere other than prominently displayed immediately on page load is going to aggravate your customers. In that case there is definitely "a fold." The fact that there's 4k different devices viewing your page doesn't change the fact that their browser window has a bottom, it just means that the location of that bottom is volatile. If you really care, your page design can be responsive to not just the width of the browser window but the height as well. Abusing the concept of a fold is lazy and ignorant. It shouldn't be treated like the only aspect of web browsing that matters. But at the same time, ignoring the fact that some of your content will be immediately viewable to users upon loading the page and other content won't, is also lazy and ignorant.

scott_s 12y ago

Please label your axes. The units are not obvious. I think the x-axis is pixels, where 0 is the top of the viewable part of the browser, and increases downward, but it took me a long time to figure that out. (My initial guess was milliseconds into a page view, but that makes no sense since I assume the y-axis on the second graph is seconds into engagement.)

Animats 12y ago

Sounds like a justification for that horrible Wordpress theme with small blocks of text in a huge font, alternating with images that scroll at a different rate than the text.

api 12y ago
"horrible Wordpress theme" Just Wordpress? I think you're describing every web site designed since 2008 there.
sparkzilla 12y ago
Those are called "parallax" themes.

devindotcom 12y ago

The concept of the fold is a valuable and flexible one, to be interpreted within the context of the page or platform on which it is supposed to exist. Organizing and prioritizing presentation of data relies on recognizing certain patterns of display and activity, and the fold is wrapped up in that. Why try to deny the existence of a well-known and useful term and construct rather than help redefine it, the way we've done with other terms dating from the relatively distant past? (edit:sp)

protonfish 12y ago
"The fold" is where a newspaper folds in half. Unless your users are folding their computers in half, it really has no place in digital screen design. I agree that the closer to the top of a document you place something, the more prominence it has, but this has nothing at all to do with a "fold."
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  In digital content, "the fold" has its own meaning (which is, certainly, inspired by the literal fold in newspaper.) This is one of many digital design that are inspired by terms from print, like "page" (which also is inappropriate for digital if you take the print meaning literally.) And, anyway, laptop users do fold their computers in half, but that's a completely different thing.
  - e12e 12y ago
    > In digital content, "the fold" has its own meaning Does it? I suppose it could mean "outside the first screen", as in on the next "card" in a mobile "slide deck", or "below the scroll" in a browser (that is: content that is on the virtual page, but outside the viewport). But my impression is that people are not using it like that -- in which case "the fold" is probably a poor/wrong metaphor/term? > This is one of many digital design that are inspired by terms from print, like "page" (which also is inappropriate for digital if you take the print meaning literally.) Not really. In (magazine/newspaper) print, a page typically holds various assorted content. Especially so for the front page. Now, with scrolling, "page" will often mean "all of a document at a given URL" -- and that would typically be different from a print page. In that case "viewport" would be more appropriate. But I think the confusion really lies in the print world: "page" means both "what the user can see at any one time" (viewport) and "largest section of connected layout" (the physical page). > And, anyway, laptop users do fold their computers in half, but that's a completely different thing. But mobile users did, at least for a while. There were/are some phones with a small screen on the back of the "flip". AFAIK all of these only have enough real-estate for a small icon and simple scrolling text message though. And aren't really meant for showing a preview of some random web page, but rather to alert the user to incomming email etc.

chuckcode 12y ago

Darn it, the internet just broke advertising again...

torkable 12y ago

Came expecting interesting FP article, leave disappointed.

sparkzilla 12y ago

This is great research, and confirms to me that readers are not put off by long pages, and are actively looking to scroll for information.

timme 12y ago
If a 4 word claim with a few overstyled charts qualifies as research then we're doomed anyways.

ronilan 12y ago

Twitter should take note of Tumblr usage here.

ztnewman 12y ago

Why on earth would you post this as a series of tweets.. and then embed them in a tumblr post.. without any additional commentary..

rscott 12y ago
Sadly, because tweetstorms are getting more and more popular. I think it gives people a superiority feeling ("aha, look at how much brilliance I can convey in so few characters!"), whereas the reader is just frustrated.
theandrewbailey 12y ago
This article needs more words. A series of graphs alone that seem to contradict the title doesn't convey useful information.
acjohnson55 12y ago
100% this! I'm seeing more and more tweets that are entire pages of text in JPEG format. I can't really say it's a failed medium, because obviously Twitter has massive usage, but it doesn't really seem like progress.

smacktoward 12y ago

It's not so much that there is no fold as that there are a zillion folds. Where the content of a page rolls down off the bottom of the screen depends on so many things: display size, resolution, browser window size, browser chrome, add-ons, toolbars, etc. etc. etc... So I always find it a bit amusing to hear people talk in the Web context about "above the fold." Oh, that goes above the fold? OK, which one?

brokentone 12y ago
So "there is no _single_ fold" perhaps makes the most sense?

Kiro 12y ago

I may be stupid but I don't understand the graphs. What are the axes?

JStanton617 12y ago

This is 100% ripped off from http://blog.chartbeat.com/2013/08/12/scroll-behavior-across-the-web/ http://blog.chartbeat.com/2013/08/12/scroll-behavior-across-...