christos wrote:The average user doesn't really know or care
We can't expect the average user to understand how things work, they just know their phone battery gets sucked up along with their bandwidth allowance, and that they can't quickly check a page at subway stops as the thing takes too long to load.
christos wrote:The social media marketer doesn't care that only 1% of users will use a feature
Herein lies the problem.
What evidence is there that any of this stuff actually increases sales?
I'd really like to know.
christos wrote:Most of these buttons include random like numbers to be displayed or the option to display no numbers.
Yes I know how they work, I've produced many websites in my time.
The thing is, if you choose not to display the numbers, or display a random one to ensure something looks positive/popular, then it simply proves the point that no-one is using the buttons or you'd use the real numbers.
christos wrote:images will always need to be fairly large
There is no need for an image to be larger than the resolution it is being displayed at.
If the user wants to mouse over and magnify an image (or click on it if "old skool") that's when you fetch a larger version.
Again, all web designers should be made to reads/watch this:
A fine example from the above link:
"Consider this recent Vice article about botnets.
At the top of the article is a pointless 3 megabyte photograph of headphones."
It's over 270 page resources, 10MB and 7 seconds to load on my quad core i7 connected to a 300Mbps internet connection.
And that's *with* my ad blocker turned on!
I mean, seriously?!
7 seconds was the average page load time 20 years ago, the experience is no better today because we've taken every advance in cpu and data transmission and filled it with junk.
And if that was an old school web page, just a single column like that with the diagram in question and a featured item on top, I the end user read the same story/content in what, 500KB and sub half second load time?
Again, from the link above:
Look how much text there is, and maybe what, 25 pictures to re-inforce the point.
And that's perfectly fine as content. The fact that it's 51MB is not fine.
It's either ignorance or laziness. Pure and simple.
Blaming the clients is just an excuse. The clients pay for expertise.
And if nothing else, people should take some pride in their work...