i.e. Apple is an electronics selling website, and it will provide information about it's merchandise and has forums to assist their consumers, this website will be updated fully about once a year, the same for other sites, they need to keep refreshing their design to keep customers interested and provide a better experience.
A website that is constantly refreshing information, and is assisted by many people all over the globe is Wikipedia, you can search thousands of terms on a search engine and there's hundreds upon thousands of edited Wikipedia pages ready to present information on a variety of different topics. These pages involve facts as well as images and information presented to you.
What do you think? Do websites present their information well?
I completely understand what you are saying, but what about the negatives? These companies that constantly update their websites are bound to make mistakes and thus leaving room for customers to make errors. An example of this is that some information gets printed wrong on product descriptions and therefore when a product arrives it is not what the customer thought they were getting. Also Wikipedia is not always right and there are false facts posted, I think there is too much freedom on that website. What is your opinion on these points?
ReplyDeleteI agree with the information you have posted, but I feel that there are many disadvantages that have been missed out such as the freedom to edit posts on Wikipedia.
ReplyDeleteMost popular websites such as social networks and online shopping sites gain a lot of money from advertising and then use this money to spend on website design. I think that a lot of people will stay on a web page for less time if the site is slow or unprofessional looking.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this blog entry and the information that you have said however I also agree with 'Jacob Todd's post with how he has said that you have missed out a few of the disadvantages.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you all that there is negatives about presenting information. I didn't take that into consideration and I understand that sites like Wikipedia do have invalid sources, there is lots of freedom amongst some sites that I don't think is a positive. Billy, I agree about the advertising and the unprofessional site, as I think that it's not appealing for the readers. Thank you for the response.
ReplyDelete