Pharyngula

Pharyngula has moved to http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/

Tuesday, October 18, 2005

Jakob Nielsen is obsolete

Sharon has a good critique of web design guru Jakob Nielsen, who has deigned to tell us what all is wrong with weblogs. It's mainly a list of things he doesn't understand; I was very unimpressed. Here's his list of terrible mistakes we're making.

1. No Author Biographies

OK, kinda. I like seeing bios, but as everyone who reads weblogs knows, what we tune in for is the author's voice, not their CV. This is entirely optional.

2. No Author Photo

Another optional feature. You know, his first two items completely ignore the fact that many very good webloggers are anonymous, and that doesn't hamper their appeal. As you'll see below, though, this is apparently an important feature to Dr Nielsen.

3. Nondescript Posting Titles

That's actually useful. An article titled "Blog Post #217" is not informative, and he does offer good hints for titling stuff. I'll give that one a thumbs up.

4. Links Don't Say Where They Go

There is a grain of truth to his complaint that a link like this—"here"—isn't very enticing or informative. Weblogs tend to be link heavy, though, and context is important. I'll agree with him that links could be clearer.

5. Classic Hits are Buried

True enough. Entries are often ephemeral, and sometimes it's very hard to find a memorable post from the past. Google helps (I use the 'site:' modifier in google searches a fair amount), but it's often the case that much vanishes into voluminous archives. That is one reason I've got that "Taste of Pharyngula" block over to the left.

6. The Calendar is the Only Navigation

Hasn't he heard of categories?

7. Irregular Publishing Frequency

Here he starts wandering way off base. "pick a publication schedule and stick to it"…is he nuts? That's what RSS is for, to pick up articles as they are published.

8. Mixing Topics

We're supposed to specialize and stick to just one subject: "Specialized sites rule the Web." Malarkey. My favorite sites tend to have a general theme, but part of the pleasure of reading them is their discursive nature. When Neilsen sits down to have a conversation with someone, does he start yelling at them if they wander off the pre-arranged topic?

9. Forgetting That You Write for Your Future Boss

This is his worst suggestion of them all: muzzle yourself now in preparation for your future corporate overlords. Screw that, bozo.

10. Having a Domain Name Owned by a Weblog Service

More cluelessness: he's complaining that having a blogspot or typepad address is like having a geocities website, and that no one will take you seriously. Hmmm...Atrios, Majikthise, Ezra Klein, Hullabaloo, Lawyers, Guns, and Money, Lance Mannion. It's the voice not the vehicle. As long as the host is reliable, we don't care, and I attach no stigma to using even a lowest common denominator service like blogspot.

I give him a 3 out of 10. Not very good.

Need I mention that I find his site violates my personal usability guidelines? No RSS feed, no commenting, no trackbacks. He does have a biography page with a photo…and "Additional high-resolution photos are available for download." And here I thought weblogging was a vanity activity.


Trackback url: http://pharyngula.org/index/trackback/3167/9m6THIqr/

Comments:
#44455: — 10/18  at  12:16 PM
6. The Calendar is the Only Navigation

Hasn't he heard of categories?


You're being a little unfair here, considering that almost all of the text beneath that heading addresses categories and how best to use them.



#44457: bill — 10/18  at  12:22 PM
I blogger guilty on all counts.

Nielsen is just uptight 'cause he didn't get invited to the Viking orgy.



#44459: Jenn — 10/18  at  12:26 PM
I will die before I let go of the punny title! I demand that the search engines bow to my will and use the body of my post to make more accurate searches.

Categories would be nice though, I have to admit.



#44461: — 10/18  at  12:30 PM

<blockquote>6. The Calendar is the Only Navigation

Hasn't he heard of categories?</blockquote>

I don't understand what your complaint is here... Nielsen is saying that having only a calendar to navigate posts (Which is fairly common) is bad. But having categories is good, so that's why he said: "Most weblog software provides a way to categorize postings ..." and "Do use categorization ..." It's almost as if you're reading that problem he's listing as the way to design a blog.



#44462: Alon Levy — 10/18  at  12:33 PM
Actually, I sort of agree with point #8. My favorite weblogs are those that specialize in something, with only the occasional delve into general political bickering.



#44466: Orac — 10/18  at  12:45 PM
I agree with a lot of what you say, but Nielson isn't totally without merit. For example, this piece of advice was quite good:

"Certainly, you shouldn't post when you have nothing to say. Polluting cyberspace with excess information is a sin. To ensure regular publishing, hold back some ideas and post them when you hit a dry spell."

To which I would add: Whenever you think of something to blog about, write it down somewhere on a list, so that you have ideas to tide you over inevitable dry spells.

He's more right than wrong about publishing frequency, as well. Most people don't use RSS readers.

On the other hand, as far as specialization goes, he's partially right. I think it's a good thing to have an overall theme to one's blog (for me, it's skepticism and the scientific method, particularly as applied to medicine), but one shouldn't be limited by one's theme. For example, if I feel like doing an occasional post on politics or current events, I do it. Ditto music, humor, and the occasional personal post. But the vast majority of my posts stick to the theme.

Oh, and as about the calendar thing, if you use Blogspot, there are no categories to use (which is one reason why I'm seriously thinking of switching to TypePad or some other blogging platform).

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com



#44469: Orac — 10/18  at  12:49 PM
It also occurs to me. Nielen's website is butt ugly. This guy is a web design guru?

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com



's avatar #44470: PZ Myers — 10/18  at  12:57 PM
Dry spell? Who ever has a dry spell?

I agree that themes are good, but any blog that stuck singlemindedly to one theme would, with few exceptions, be a rather boring site. One wouldn't return to it often except when you needed information on that one narrow topic.

His site is plain verging on ugly, but it is very functional. But then, so was Soviet architecture.


OK, everyone, I will concede that his point #6 is OK, bringing him up to a score of 4 out of 10.

PZ Myers
Division of Science and Math
University of Minnesota, Morris



#44471: — 10/18  at  01:07 PM
It also occurs to me. Nielen's website is butt ugly. This guy is a web design guru?


Nielsen has always stated that his website is a good example of why one should use a professional designer, if one wants to make a company website.

Now, people might expect me to leap in defense of Nielsen, as he is one of the big Danish IT people, but frankly I think he is overrated. He had some good points back when the internet was a fairly new phenomenom, but he is out of touch, and some of his ideas are downright stupid (his concept that three testers are enough to find all flaws in a websites is one of the stupidest I've heard).

At this stage, Nielsen should just be considered a relic of the past, and be ignored.



Trackback: My readers are disloyal and low-value Tracked on: Creek Running North (65.58.240.229) at 2005 10 18 12:43:03
... or so bleats Jakob Nielsen, who is a prime example if ever there was one of a person with an ossified world view. While categorizing the things bloggers do wrong - a couple of which he gets more or...



#44472: — 10/18  at  01:07 PM
Nielsen is an officious little twit whose ranting becomes ever more tiresome and irrelevant. Thank you for swatting him down; all I ever hear regarding him is a collective slurping hubbub of ass-kissing.

Love your blog, by the way.



#44473: — 10/18  at  01:09 PM
It also occurs to me. Nielen's website is butt ugly. This guy is a web design guru?


Orac, I just realized that I didn't correct the misconception in this. Nielsen is not a web design guru, but a web usability guru. Back when he started, he was among the first to focus on this area, and bring up the cognitive aspects of web design.



#44474: — 10/18  at  01:10 PM
About the only things he left out are that blogs aren't published on paper and don't have editors. Surely part of the success of blogging is due to the individuality of each contributor and their determination to do things their own way (even if that way may be annoying to some readers)?

Personally I find blogs that only stay on a certain topic to be much less 'personable and easy to relate to' than those simply without photos - but if Nielsen feels the opposite way, then he's welcome to visit different blogs to the ones I do.



#44475: Ron Zeno — 10/18  at  01:16 PM
LOL! Nielsen being discussed on Pharyngula.

Jakob's just fishing for customers. Mostly he targets people with little or no understanding of usability or web design. More importantly, he targets the extremely gullible. He's just another example of a researcher-turned-consulting-guru that left his professional ethics long ago.

Be thankful that biology is a real science. Usability sometimes pretends to be based upon science, but there's little value for even the "gurus" to do so.



#44477: Orac — 10/18  at  01:23 PM
PZ,

I never said one should stick single-mindedly to a theme. Certainly mty own blog would be a bad example of that. But (usually, at least) more of my posts than not do stick to the theme. Fortunately, it helps that my theme (skepticism and critical thinking related to pseudoscience, quackery, and pseudohistory) is broad enough to encompass many blogging sins....

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com



#44483: pdf23ds — 10/18  at  01:45 PM
I've always found that what I most miss in some weblogs RSS feeds for comments on individual posts. (E-mail notification is only a poor substitute, and even that I've only ever seen here on Pharyngula.)

Actually, my main pet peeve with a lot of blogs is the incredibly small font size they use. I can use Firefox to increase the size, but then my scrolling isn't the same. (And I absolutely hate it when sites set their line spacing much higher--or even worse, lower--than the default. PZ, you're guilty here, but Pandagon is worse.)

That said, I think I've only ever /not read/ a blog because of its formatting maybe twice? And in those cases the sin was making the site virtually illegible in Firefox, way too wide for example, or with absolutely terrible layout.



#44485: Jeff — 10/18  at  01:54 PM
I discovered Nielsen while doing research for a web design/programming class I was teaching a few years back. As Kristjan notes, Nielsen is a web usability "guru," not a web design guru.

He's useful for teaching some basic dos and don'ts to novice web designers, but that's about it; he simply can't seem to keep up with the latest technological and stylistic trends...you know, the stuff that makes the web at all interesting.

The fact that he's turning his design-hating, multimedia-bashing, individuality-fearing "usability" scope on weblogs just makes me think he's totally lost it. His strict and archaic demands of web authors (who are not necessarily either designers or coders) remind me of a colleague with whom I once worked, who insisted that all good graphic design is based on the Swiss Grid. Just silly, pointless, and pompous.



's avatar #44486: — 10/18  at  01:55 PM
# 8 and # 9 are right. #8 says specialization is the way of the blogosphere. There are no general blogs, all talk to restricted publics. Pharyngula talks to literate people with interest in biology. Re # 9, the instructive case of Chicago U blogger Dan Drezner proves Nielsen right.

Quod natura non sunt turpia



#44487: pdf23ds — 10/18  at  01:57 PM
Actually, I think the biggest shortcoming of blogging as a format is a sin of omission. It fails to take advantage of the ability of the web to provide a persistent forum for debate, where topics and threads don't "die", as they do in blogging and message forums. They would instead be added to, and just as often, refactored and cleaned up and edited and summarized and organized. Wiki provides many of these benefits, but group ownership and anyone-can-edit also impose some severe limitations on the possibilities of the medium, and make it vulnerable to other kinds of problems. Specifically, contentious issues can't really be discussed as productively on Wiki, both because the identity of commenters isn't always made clear enough, and because people too often "disagree by deleting".

I think it should be possible somehow to provide a forum where the persistence of topics and the stateless, timeless feeling of Wiki are combined with strong ownership of posts and (optionally) of comments. How this would be accomplished, though, I'm not sure about, though I do have some specific ideas. (I've thought about this in the past, but my ideas have changed a *lot*. (That site's dynamic portion is non-functional, but I wanted the essays to remain up.))



#44493: — 10/18  at  02:10 PM
Omitting a bio and a photo makes it much easier not to write for your future employer. Nothing is easier than to be forever connected to mistakes by using your real name on the internet.

I tend to think of people as naive if they have personally identifiable details in their blog and don't have tenure.



#44501: — 10/18  at  02:31 PM

Need I mention that I find his site violates my personal usability guidelines? No RSS feed, no commenting, no trackbacks.


If the comments Nielsen received were anything like yours, I'm not so sure it would constitute an improvement.



#44503: Johnny Vector — 10/18  at  02:34 PM
Hmm. Let's discuss the only blog I read with religious ahem regularity (this one).

1. Author biography. Check.
2. Author photo. Check.
3. Good posting titles. Check.
4. Links that say where they go. Check.
5. Classic hits exposed. Check.
6. Categories. Check.
7. Regular publishing frequency. Check.
8. Limited range of topics. Check.
9. Remember you're writing for future bosses. Check. (tenure!)
10. Real domain name. Check. (two, no less)

Sorry PZ, actions speak louder than words. You're a usability geek, like it or not.

His site is plain verging on ugly, but it is very functional. But then, so was Soviet architecture.

Hah! You've never been to the former Soviet Union, have you?

Kristjan:
He had some good points back when the internet was a fairly new phenomenom, but he is out of touch, and some of his ideas are downright stupid (his concept that three testers are enough to find all flaws in a websites is one of the stupidest I've heard).

Er, when did he say that? The closest I can find is when he said that 3 (five, sir) testers would find most of the problems. If you still think that's stupid, how about some data to back it up? That's what I like about Dr. Nielsen; he uses actual data from actual tests to support (and modify) his theories. Huh. Science.



#44504: Orac — 10/18  at  02:35 PM
That is a concern, but anonymity on the web is ephemeral anyway if you have a persistent presence. The longer you blog (or participate in online discussions in Usenet or other forums), the more likely that you will be "outed," unless you are very, very careful. There are only two ways I can think of to avoid it. Either never write anything controversial, so that no one ever gets mad enough or curious enough to start digging, or switch 'nyms periodically. If you post controversial stuff, blog long enough, or become popular enough, sooner or later someone will link your real name to your blog and it will be posted and out there forever. It's almost inevitable. Once that happens, a diligent potential employer could find your blog by doing a few Google and Yahoo! searches if you've ever slipped up and mentioned your real name or if anyone has ever posted anything linking you to your blog. Believe me, I know from personal experience.

Fortunately, if you Google my name the first things that pop up are my University and Medical Group web pages, but it doesn't take much additional digging to find a page linking me to my blog. A certain altie who really doesn't like what I've had to say over the last four months or so debunking the claimed link between mercury in vaccines and autism made sure of that.

So why do I maintain the 'nym?

I figure, why make it too easy to figure out who I really am or to link me with my blog?

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com



#44506: Orac — 10/18  at  02:38 PM
One more reason to keep the 'nym: I like the Orac persona.

--
Orac “A statement of fact cannot be insolent.”
http://oracknows.blogspot.com



#44510: — 10/18  at  02:47 PM
Er, when did he say that? The closest I can find is when he said that 3 (five, sir) testers would find most of the problems. If you still think that's stupid, how about some data to back it up? That's what I like about Dr. Nielsen; he uses actual data from actual tests to support (and modify) his theories. Huh. Science.



Johnny Vector, you want to read these articles:

Why and When Five Test Users aren’t Enough (pdf) and Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increased sample sizes in usability testing (pdf)

In fairness to Nielsen, he does qualify his statement, but I still get tired of hearing the same 3-5 testers are enough canard.



Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 >

Next entry: Behe: I call shenanigans

Previous entry: Viking orgy!

<< Back to main

Info

email PZ Myers
Search
Archives
UMM—America's best public liberal arts college