This compilation of the world’s worst websites will make your head hurt

Originally published at: This compilation of the world's worst websites will make your head hurt | Boing Boing


A couple of years ago we were calling this web brutalism.


Yep, it’s still a thing.


These just look like websites from the late 90’s early 00’s that haven’t been updated to “web 2.0” standards. Some will have used templates generated with Dreamweaver, Front Page or even coded by hand.
Aren’t you doing the equivalent of laughing at old people for their dress sense? Sure there is questionable design decisions and color choices. Tools were limited and the people who made them were unlikely to have been trained in web design or any user interface design for that matter. If they were using template software they probably couldn’t code much either.


see also

just a few days ago.


On the other hand, these websites probably load in one second flat or less, even on a slow DSL connection like I had until just a couple of years ago, and which many are still stuck with.

And you can get to anything from the main page. Clutter is not necessarily worse than minimalism for the sake of minimalism.

And in closing, I think this webpage style is completely appropriate for “Barry’s 8 Track Repair” or “Mr. Methane”.


Related: (fun read)


Isn’t this exactly why social media was invented - to share examples of people doing things they haven’t been trained for, so we can make fun of them? Oh, and pet videos, although that largely amounts to the same thing.


I though it was created to meet hot chicks?

Not to actually meet them, no.


That one with the aliens coming to evacuate some of us is… kind of current?
If folks from outer space offered me their hospitality, I would consider the offer very seriously.


Angelfire hell.


Honestly I find these sorts of websites far less egregious than all the user hostile crap I see on big ecommerce websites. Popups, secret subscription checkboxes, forceful mailing list registrations.

There are multi-billion dollar companies though, that make similarly bad use of screen real estate.


Only slightly off-topic, I promise–I confess to being largely ignorant about naturism, but I was under the impression that naturists prefer to go about “as nature intended.” If so, what’s the deal about “shaving”? Do naturists find natural body hair undesirable?

1 Like

My wife owns a small ecommerce site and the firm rules are no pop-ups, no checkboxes (except at checkout) and minimize the need to scroll on mobile. In terms of page load time, her site runs laps around Amazon & Ebay.


trying to read bb blog on my old but still fine for me iPhone SE 1st gen.


There’s no hard and fast rule. There’s as much variety of opinion amongst naturists as in the general populations. But here’s some ideas that apply to some.

I can’t remember where, but somewhere on this forum in the last few weeks I recall a male posting that the good thing about wearing a mask for COVID was that he didn’t need to shave every day.

If (stubble visible) 
  shave beard
  don't shave beard
end if

Also, I know women who shave their armpits in summer, when they wear summer dress or tops that expose their armpits, but who don’t shave in winter, when they’re wearing jumpers or coats that ensure their armpits are invisible.

If (armpit visible) 
  shave armpit
  don't shave armpit
end if

Some naturists just do the obvious extension to the above.

As for the “as nature intended” bit, I’ve always thought that is often a rationalisation rather than a reason. Evolutionary forces never envisaged that those with very white skin that evolved in the far North would migrate to temperate zones and become nudists, which is why you tend to find that white naturists use sunscreen, which is hardly a “natural” product. Which leads to the final point: Sunscreen goes on more easily when there’s no hair in the way. Which is also one reason why many people with baldspots prefer to wear a hat rather than trying to get sunscreen onto a bald spot completely surrounded by hair.


Hmmm - in some ways these sites are much better examples of usable design than the bloated designer mess of many modern web sites which not only require megabytes of code to work at all, but where links are disguised and there are no obvious cues to show what is clickable, what isn’t or what will happen if you do click.

Eye bleeding - yes, but not necessarily bad UI.


To be fair Ling, of Lings Cars is hilarious. Check out the karaoke.

I have an example of a site I was involved a lot of time ago, was the XX century and this newfangled thingy called www was all the rage a friend of mine, that was in a veteran association asked me if I could help putting up a website for the association. I helped him to select a provider, getting a domain and so on.

Now he asked me an easy way on how put up material, and at the time CMS software wasn’t a thing, so because they have bought Microsoft Office i said that they could use FrontPage.

Still using Frontpage in 2021, because it works well for them, thae y have to put up sometimes the announces of meetings and the like and it works, no cookies neded as a side effect, so no pesky banners, and the page loads fast. Why they have to change, and by the way have to pay more the hosting provider?