Other Web Sites’ Traffic
By David Golding
| 
Print This Post
Being able to measure another web site’s traffic, or even better, a lot of other web sites’ traffic, can mean the difference between 1% market share and 10%. In offline operations, most companies do moderate to high levels of research trying to identify one’s position compared to market competitors.
Online Tools
Some tools have popped up saying they’re doing just that: measuring site traffic and making the data public. The most well-known is probably Alexa. There, you will find traffic estimations and rankings for millions of web sites. The problem with relying completely on Alexa, however, is that it is only and estimation, and in my own measurements, I have found Alexa to be off in significant ways. (Specifically, my work on BYU’s School of Education web site has shown Alexa to be way off.)
To offset these problems, here are a couple of competing tools that, in my book, do a better job.
Quantcast
Quantcast.com is much like Alexa, but it provides demographic data as well. Site admins can verify their own sites to enhance the accuracy of the data, and the layout is much more aesthetic than Alexa’s clumsy design.
Compete
Compete.com also provides useful data much like Quantcast and Alexa, but it also has a toolbar for Firefox or Internet Explorer that makes accessing the data simple, without having to browse to their site (a feature I, personally, enjoy).
My favorite feature of Compete is its Trust Score. They’ve added the dimension of credibility, a measure that is only increasing in importance as the web grows. Yes, it is estimated in some cases, but the trustworthyness of a web site is at least expressed in some form, essential for when you’re trying to identify a credibly source.
Making the Data Work
Ideally, the traffic scores from these three sites would be averaged when trying to get an idea of a competitor’s traffic load. As Quantcast and Compete both grab data from more accurate sources than Alexa, either one of those are preferred over the latter.
The 3 Click Rule: Not Applicable?
By David Golding
| Print This Post
Usability folks have been preaching the 3-click rule for years: if a user can’t get to a page within 3 clicks, then the navigation needs to be tweaked. Overall, I think this rule has proven to be effective. Sites like Apple.com and Google.com operate by this guideline and have wonderfully navigable user interfaces.
However, a more important element should be planned and executed before implementing the 3-click rule. Jared M. Spool, Christine Perfetti, and David Brittan published a report that in some ways debunks the 3-click concept. In Designing for the Scent of Information, they posit that what users expect is that every click they make gets them closer to the information they seek. As long as they have indicators that they are heading in the right direction, they won’t likely abandon the site.
So rather than applying a strict 3-click rule, site designers would do well to develop a significant indicator of where the user came from, where he or she is at, and where he or she is headed. This doesn’t necessarily mean creating fancy breadcrumbs, although such navigation trails are certainly userful. The overall design of the site, and of each page, ought to be clear enough that the user doesn’t have to squint or zoom in to decipher what’s going on and where elements are located.
Let me introduce an analogy that has helped me focus on the more important design points we’re talking about here. Take a look at Apple’s iPhone internet video. You’ll see a device that quite strikingly produces a clear, useful view of web pages. Now, on the iPhone, when the page first loads, only certain elements are visible without zooming in.
Design your site so that the user gets, in the screen size of an iPhone, (on the first instance) indicators of their navigation. A breadcrumb probably won’t work, now, will it? But your H1′s and H2′s will, as well as images and graphic elements.
Utah Governor Signs “Stop Porn” Resolution
By David Golding
| Print This Post
I just got word of an important development in internet pornography legistlation and noticed that it isn’t available online anywhere. It’s so important, I just have to spread the word.
Utah governor Jon Huntsman signed a resolution last Friday that aims to build a technological solution to filter pornography. If another nine or more states follow suit, Congress will be obligated to address the issue.
Ralph Yarro, chairman of the CP80 Foundation (CP80.org), a non-profit group helping businesses combat internet pornography through tech consulting, said, “We are excited about this first step. It shows that people are ready to take action.”
The resolution specifically addresses technological solutions that allow parents, schools, and businesses the ability to fully restrict pornography access through the internet without filtering or proxy servers. Pornography vendors still would have the same access to internet technology, but legislation would make serving up porn via port 80 (the main port through which all web sites flow) illegal.
