…And hopefully, that’s only on my mac.
It looks like the website was deprived a very underestimated yet imperative web development phase, cross browser compatibility testing. A phase which ensures that the user’s experience is enhanced regardless of the browser and platform being used to access the site. Ensuring that your website works across multiple web browsers, platforms and devices will ensure that your website is accessible to as wide range of users as possible.
That’s one phase that makes a web developer’s life hell. While the developer’s priority should always be the site’s users with their browsers and platform in mind. That doesn’t make the process any easier because you still have to contend with different versions of those particular browsers, so a website that functions perfectly on IE 6.0 may look completely different on IE 4.0.
The National Broadcaster’s online nightmare is however, worse than I thought. It seems like the website doesn’t display properly not only on mac browsers but also on some windows browsers. If not all.
Personally, I think the site was tested only on one browser. The web developer’s.
I won’t even touch the look of the site, the functionality (or lack of one) is what I will focus on.
And who is to blame? The web developer, or the client?
Simple, the developer.
Reason being, the process of avoiding such nightmares should be part of the debugging phase. You’re free to argue, but it’s unfair for a client to pay and still be given the task of ensuring that their website displays properly across major browsers or at least those of their target market.
Would you think of it as a fair trade if they sell you condoms and make it your responsibility to ensure that they work properly? I doubt it. You might have quite a hefty price to pay, your life. In business ‘your life’ would be your company image.
This looks horrible on the Sabc’s image. What if the visitor is a potential business client doing their research on the broadcaster through their website?
I personally judge people and companies on their image. If you hand me a ‘cheap-powerpoint-designed-looking’ business card and still expect me to trust you with my brand then I’d say you’re being over ambitious. If you don’t take your image seriously then how the hell would I trust you with mine?
A company’s reputation is often confused with their image. Reputation is only one component of an overall image.
The Sabc might have a reputation for broadcasting quality and appealing tv shows to its audience but one thing they should know is that their company image also includes the quality of their marketing, advertising and presentation materials.
Content is sure king and if you agree to that, then that makes presentation queen.
And what’s a king without a queen?