Website Design Review. The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly!

I liked the lecture on the components of a well 'C.R.A.P.H.T.E.D" website.  For me a big component is navigation and ease of use.  Many sites have slick photos and graphics, but are horrible to navigate and some even make it hard to contact the company to spend your money!

I reviewed the following websites, and cover them in greater detail further down this post.

The Good:
www.ford.com
www.toyota.com

The Bad and The Ugly:
www.gforceracecars.com
www.rishsoil.com/raising-chickens.jsp

Let's get the stinkers out of the way first:

The Ugly:   www.gforceracecars.com

This site has a lot wrong with it, and many mis-steps in the category of "ease of use".  These are summarized as follows:

1. The main page requires eeeeextensive scrolling to reach the bottom of the page, with no 'return to top' button once you finally reach the bottom.  The main page is a running scroll of articles, with no clear hierarchy or organization to their placement.
2. The reversed type (white type on black background) is hard to read, and many of the color combos in the site have poor contrast, such as magenta against black, and other dark on dark color combinations.
3. Poor photogaphy.  The apparel section has photos of shirts that look like they just came out of the wash - unfolded.   The photo resolution is also poor.  

The Bad:  www.rishsoil.com/raising-chickens.jsp

This site actually has a lot of good information...but again it is incredibly difficult to read.  So again we see errors in 'ease of use', and also in 'typography'.

1. With 'ease of use', the navigation back to the main page when one clicks on an article is hard to find. 
2. Also, the articles need to be organized into a hierarchy of topics, such as 'raising animals', and 'stuff about dirt', to make it easier to for the reader to find what they are after.  
3. Lastly, the font (typography) is all in one size, running down the page as straight text, to the point I feel like I'm reading code rather than a blog post.  There needs to headers to break up the articles, and there needs to be 'back to the top' and other navigation tools for the reader to exit these text sinkholes. 

The Good:  www.ford.com

1. The all important search bar on the main page, which works very well (I tested it).  Also, the main menu headings (ford social, find a dealer, espanol, etc.) carry through regardless of where you are in the site.  The main page does not require scrolling to get to the top or bottom of it.  The footer on the main page also includes the site map.  The site has excellent organization via menu categories.
2. The color, contrast, layout and image quality of the site are all top notch.  The text (black on white background) is easy to read.  There is also a quick link to the same site in spanish.  Each page is visually appealing, with a consistent layout (header, pictures, text, footer).
3. The build and price feature is a wonderful use of the internet, allowing people to customize their car as they wish, see what it would look like, and what it would cost.  

In summary, the site is easy to navigate, visually appealing, and it features the co's products (cars) in a very appealing way and makes it very easy for the customer to purchase.  A+ Ford!

More Good:  www.toyota.com

In fairness, these auto websites have big bucks to spend on their sites, but I've seen plenty of small businesses get their sites correct, and there is also no shortage of big businesses with complicated and hard to navigate sites.  Toyota is another car company that got it right.

1. Like Ford, again we see excellent graphics, a robust search bar on the main page, and a consistent layout of header, graphics, text and footer with site map.  Toyotoa does a better job with their visuals in the sense they have more lifestyle shots, with moms getting into SUV's with their grade schoolers, and dad at the lake fishing with his family.  
2. I would give Toyota lower scores on their menu organization, as they opted for a storyboard based menu format, which results in the entire menu options not being visible on the main page.  Much like a google search, the user must click down a level (with red buttons that are not clear what they are).
3. Other than this menu nuance, the two car sites are virtually identical in their menu categories and organization.  A- for Toyota.