So 2021 webdesign is all about
- HUUUUGE fonts
- the same cookie joke everywhere
- annoying mouse cursor hijacking
- scroll hijacking, again
- text moving around while you scroll
I feel like all the webagencies have those now.

I wish I could have a mac accessibility parameter (or browser one) to say "No, I NEVER want you to change my mouse cursor for some custom one this is a nightmare for my eyes and brain". But well, who cares about accessibility, right?

To be clear I'm not piking on this particular one, I just feel like all the fancy communication/web agencies websites now look like that and most of them are usability and accessibility nightmares. But I guess it must work for their clients?

@stephaniewalter Feels like when it use to be done with Flash 😹

@stephaniewalter Back when I was at a very large agency, we (front end engineering team) dreaded the yearly push to redesign our own agency site.

The design team always unerringly excluded us from the meetings - something never done for client work - and the end result was always a accessibility nightmare.

Accessibility lived with Information Architects and Frontend Engineering. The visual design team couldn’t give a fuck about it, and it always showed in the agency site.

@stephaniewalter When I see these stuff, I always recall how I made a website for my uncles' since defunct tile business using make, m4 and gawk, back in 2015 or something.

Nothing surprising there of course, but the interesting thing was not a single person complained about it, and customers/partners really liked it, I was told. Which is interesting because it was the heyday of webdevs going berserk, when playing AAA games on the browser etc. was all the talk...


@stephaniewalter That's to say, this is probably more to do with agencies than clients.

IMO most clients will pick the reasonable, accessible, nice and clean option, when presented. Not even speaking of how it's _way_ cheaper.

But they are only presented these stuff, and they're told that's what their in turn customers want, so they pick whatever looks sufficiently sophisticated and flashy.

On the agencies' side surface complexity and flashiness leads to more $$ charged, so there's no


@stephaniewalter incentive to present the sane option, which is usually very cheap to produce and publish.

Like probably >90% of their work could be transformed to weekend SSG projects, and how much they could charge for that?

And they are lucky because most clients either don't spend their own money and/or lack the info to request what makes sense for them economically.

(sorry for the long reply..)


@cadadr I think it's also an echochamber of those agencies who want to win awwwaaaaards and stuff with their website. At this point those websites are not for humans; they are like the pastry chefs "chef d'oeuvre", fancy yet impossible to eat just to show off. Which makes me sad, because then, they all look the same haha

@stephaniewalter also:
- site completely unusable without 50 different barnacle trackers in the form of libraries and whatnot included from third party servers
- site completely empty without JS enabled

@stephaniewalter "It it mobile friendly?" "And how! See all that 300px type? Imagine how big that'll look on a phone screen!"

@stephaniewalter I hate those huge fonts. I hate going to web page and have to scroll an entire screen before being able to access the actual content.

Sign in to participate in the conversation

A Mastodon instance for and by people who make things!