30 replies to this topic

[bragadocchio]

Ammon mentioned in this post that splash pages and usability seemed at odds with one another:

I've never yet seen a splash page that was built for the user, rather than for the vanity of the company (and sometimes the web designer).

I'm really tempted to agree. I can't call to mind any uses I've seen of splash pages that were based upon providing something usable to the visitor.

But, it seemed like a topic worth exploring. I haven't done any digging around through usability research. I'm intending on doing that. But, while I am, if anyone has any suggestions or ideas on how to make a splash page usable, please have a go at it here.

Or, if you recall seeing a splash page that was geared towards visitors and not the "vanity of the company or web designer," let us know.

Do you use splash pages? If so, what do you do with them?

[Ron Carnell]

Sorta depends on your definition of Splash page, doesn't it?

The analogy, of course, seems to come from the book world, where a splash page is something that introduces and usually simplifies the content to follow. In that sense, most of my sites include a splash page, and none could easily be considered vanity-driven. My top-level index page is intended to introduce the content quickly and simply, with probably a little more promotional enthusiasm than other pages, and typically will limit the visitor to a small handful of choices. It is, usually, an entry page and not a portal page to the rest of the site.

Still, while I think my index pages serve at least some of the purpose of a real-world splash page, I doubt that's what you meant or what most people think of when they hear the term. If we define a splash page too narrowly, however, aren't we in danger of assigning our conclusions to the definition?

[bragadocchio]

If we define a splash page too narrowly, however, aren't we in danger of assigning our conclusions to the definition?

Good point, Ron.

How do we distinquish between an "entry page" and a "splash page?"

My experience with "splash pages" beyond those literary ones are the splash pages related to software applications that might take some time to load. The splash page was a way to engage the interest and attention of the user of the application while they waited.

It would also sometimes attempt to set an emotional tone.

But it really didn't do much besides just being there. It might have a "progress bar" to show how much time has passed, or will pass or how much software has loaded. But the idea was that the software that was loading was part of the application itself.

These days, when I visit a site, and the first thing I see is a message saying "loading" it isn't the site or application loading, but rather part of the "splash page" introduction to the site. If I stick around, I'm often left wondering "why did I bother to wait?"

I've seen web based splash pages that allowed people to choose between "lo-fi" and "hi-fi" versions of sites. In the past that has meant choosing between framed and unframed versions, text or graphical versions, slightly graphical sites or graphic intensive sites, or non-flash versus flash.

I've also seen splash pages that weren't the front entry to web sites, but rather one of a couple alternate entries to a site as advertised by email or newsletter, or in some other form. As a prequalified audience expecting to see a "presentation" of some type on a splash page, maybe the usability of that page isn't as much of a problem.

I think that there can be some value associated with a splash page, but I'm not sure if the benefits outweigh the detriments.

I'm also left to wonder after Ron's post, at what point does a splash page become an entry page? I'm not sure. What does an entry page do that makes it usable to visitors?

[DianeV]

I think the general understanding of "splash page" is (a) the front page of a website which (B) gives some type of graphical presentation that attempts to knock 'em dead. Then you enter the site.

These are splash pages:

- http://www.ferrari.com.tr/
- http://www.ferrariownersclub.co.uk/

As you can see, Flash is not required to qualify a front page as a splash page.

[bragadocchio]

I've been wondering if there are other uses for a splash page other than to act as a portfolio for a designer or to build a brand. I agree with Diane that the most commonly used ones often fill those two roles, and that's it.

I'd still say that the ones that ask you to make a choice before you get to the "real site" should also be considered splash pages. I would avoid them if I can, but I can understand why people might be tempted to use them.

I'd also add another category where splash pages might be most appropriate, and their use is a good one. That's on pages where a barrier may be a good idea between the site and the outside world. This may include mature audience sites, alcohol sites, and tobacco sites.

For instance:

http://www.millertime.com/av.jsp

I also enjoyed a visit to this discussion on splash screens, which has lots of links:

anti splash screens summary
http://www.listserv....&P=R3484&m=6769

It begins with this quote from Jared Spool:

My two cents (worth no more than that) on what we've seen with users
and Splash Screens:

Here's a simple experiment you can try at home:

1) Go to the supermarket.

2) Bring a Mime with you.

3) Instruct the Mime to stop everyone trying to enter the supermarket
with a short, entertaining piece that basically communicates "Welcome
to the Supermarket."  (For extra fun, add something pleasant to the
Mime's communication, like "Have a nice day" or "Bread is in aisle
6.")

4) Count the percentage of people who walk by the Mime without
stopping, the number who stop and enjoy the Mime and the number who
respond in an overtly violent nature.

That should give you the info you need to know whether a Splash Page
makes sense on your site.

[DianeV]

You're right; I forgot the version where there isn't much on the splash page but an "Enter" link, or a choice between high-res and low-res.

To tell you the truth, I'm at the point in my career where I question all the "shoulds", wherever they may have come from.

We can say that it's best for users to be able to find what they're looking for easily but, as was discussed in another thread, to me, that doesn't necessarily mean it must be within the "three clicks" rule.

There's also the matter of user experience -- how the user experiences the site. I'm sure you and I could make a site that functions perfectly well, is easy to use, is extremely low bandwidth ... and looks just awful.

Thus, while I'm not a huge fan of splash pages, and while I agree with the general concensus about splash pages, I question whether they're an absolute no-no. For all we know, there are some circumstances in which a splash page might actually enhance the target market's perception of the site and help to achieve the site owner's goals.

[bragadocchio]

To tell you the truth, I'm at the point in my career where I question all the "shoulds", wherever they may have come from.

That's probably a good place to be at, Diane. It allows you a lot more freedom to be creative if you let yourself color outside of the lines every so often.

I've been thinking that the other place where a splash page might be good in terms of user experience is when it isn't the normal front page to a site, but rather a landing page for a special event or opportunity, and is only shared via targeted marketing.

Give people the choice to go to that page or directly past it to an informational page that shows the navigation of the site, and you've created a situation where people don't feel bound to watch a presentation that they have no desire to see. But, since you're targeting to a specific market, that desire may be there.

It's not the traditional splash page, but that's only because it isn't the front page to a site. In the scenerio I describe though, it is.

Can we call that a splash page? Does it have more value in that situation?

[bwelford]

Here in Canada, where your website visitor may be French-speaking or English-speaking, it is very common to have a Splash Page that allows the visitor to click to an English Welcome page or to a French Page d'Accueil. This Splash page is often constructed with all the bells and whistles that Flash allows. Unfortunately, most of them are almost invisible to the Search Engines.

If the owner wishes to have such a Splash page then I encourage them to put more text on it so that the Search Engines will have something to work on. More importantly, I encourage them to think of their competitive advantage. Then let's put that front and centre in both official languages. At least we may hook the visitor before they click away.

A more radical solution is to have two different domains and websites for your French and English visitors. Your English visitors may go to www.abc.com, while your French visitors go to www.abc.qc.ca. Each home page is a full text page and can be optimized for the key words that apply in the language of the page. Of course you put an escape button in each case so that visitors who happen to end up at the wrong language website can click across to the website in their own language. You can read more about the idea in one of my Newsletters, "With Only One Website, Is Your Company Really Customer-Centric"

Barry Welford

[Black_Knight]

I would certainly never want to outlaw the splash page from use, nor tell people that they cannot work. True, I have yet to see one that helped the user, but that doesn't mean I never will. One day, I may come across a situation that can be helped immensely through a carefully crafted splash page.

Of course, being rather well known for SEO, I rarely expect first-time visitors to arrive through the designated 'front' of the site anyway, since around 80% of first-time visitors will be referred via searches, and arrive at a deep-level content page specific to their questions.

The splash page therefore isn't actually much good for the first-time visitor as only 20% of them (at most) will see it on their first visit (based on average stats for sites using SEO). The visitors who will see the splash page are those who typed in your domain (thus really need no excessive branding message) to their browser, or those coming through links on other sites. (You could just as easily design a designated landing page for such links, rather than bother the frequent visitors with a repetitive message).

So, a splash page is actually more likely to be seen by those who already know your domain name, than those who do not. When people start designing their splash page with that demographic in mind, perhaps we'll start to see some good and sensible uses for them.

[bragadocchio]

Interesting article, Barry. Any other approaches that might be worth pursuing other than separate sites? How effective are sites that have some multilingual pages?

Ammon, really good point about the fact that a site will receive (or should receive) a considerable amount of traffic to a page within a site, and possibly not see the splash page to begin with.

So, a splash page is actually more likely to be seen by those who already know your domain name, than those who do not. When people start designing their splash page with that demographic in mind, perhaps we'll start to see some good and sensible uses for them.

Set the wheels a turning here...

As the population of broadband users increase, might we start to see more splash pages -- and ones where content is updated on a regular basis? Might future splash pages become like modern TV commercials, or like television shows themselves?

[bwelford]

Another problem with multiple entry pages is that it is then tough to try to maximize the back-links. The current wisdom is that you should even be trying to get all your back-links pointing to the same name. So standardize on www.abc.com rather than having some back-links pointing to www.abc.com and some pointing to www.abc.com/index.htm

I am about to start a project for a client, who has a splash page with very little content and 6 flags. Each flag is a link to a different language page. However the SE visibility is not very impressive. So we have a difficult choice.

The single multi-language choice splash page is good for usability and for arranging that all back-links point to this page. The individual language pages are better for content optimization for the SE's, but will probably not get the back-links. So they are unlikely to get a good PR in Google. It seems as though we can't win here.

Which way would you handle this dilemma?

Barry Welford

[qwerty]

I suppose you could skip the splash page, go straight to your home page, and open a popup with the flags... That's much better from an SEO perspective, though I'm no fan of popups. As a user, I'd be fine with seeing the flags on the home page.

One of my clients is a fashion model -- a very new model, who hasn't had any major shows or magazine covers yet. I know nothing of fashion, so of course I had to research other models' sites when I started working on this one. The vast majority I found open with a splash page: just a picture of the model and an "enter" link. We didn't do that for my client. Instead, we went straight to a page full of relevant content.

Now, for the really famous models, I imagine people get to their sites by searching on the model's name. But for people searching for something more general, such as "young fashion model," "beautiful fashion model," or even just "fashion model," guess who comes up before the superstars?

[Black_Knight]

You know how you walk into a store and are presented with the special offers? Or board in a cafe or restaurant highlighting todays specials? Those are fitting uses for a splash page, I think.

A quick planting of a seed of interest as people, (many of whom are regulars), enter the premises.

Are any wheels turning yet?

This would also be an ideal place to advertise the presence of a newsletter or mailing list, etc. Far better than popups.

[bragadocchio]

So, if I owned a nightclub, I could use my splash page to feature upcoming performers and the dates of their appearances. A restaurant site could showcase specials. A television site could give me a shot of a scene from tonight's viewings.

A seller of goods could point out the latest and greatest prices. A movie studio could mix in (and alternate) scenes from recently released movies.

For this type of splash page to be effective, it should reward return visits in some manner, such as containing useful, interesting, and regularly updated information.

Another problem with multiple entry pages is that it is then tough to try to maximize the back-links. The current wisdom is that you should even be trying to get all your back-links pointing to the same name. So standardize on www.abc.com rather than having some back-links pointing to www.abc.com and some pointing to www.abc.com/index.htm

Here's my thoughts on that, Barry.

I'm a fan of having as many entry pages as possible on a site. Give people reasons to want to link to your site in as many places as possible. Provide them with the incentive to do that. On as many pages as possible upon your site, try to make it easy for visitors to know where they are when they visit, and where they can go. Having an interior page with a higher page rank than the main page to the site isn't a sign of failure -- its an indication of having done something well on that interior page.

As Ammon said above, it's quite possible that 80% or so of traffic to a site comes into the site somewhere other than the main page. Do you provide links to the different language versions on all of your pages? If not, why not?

The standardizing on www.example.com or www.example.com/index1.htm is a bit of a different matter. You're right -- people should make certain that they are consistent in how they identify links to their main pages.

Now, you may have your site's interior pages pointing to an index page that isn't the default splash page. Will that run the risk of defusing the way pagerank is spread around a site? Maybe. But, the more things you do to please and satisfy visitors, the more likely you'll have people linking to your site. If a splash page can be used in a manner that attracts visits, rather than acting as a showcase for the designer or a brandbuilding exercise for the site owner, it might be worth doing.

[Black_Knight]

So, if I owned a nightclub, I could use my splash page to feature upcoming performers and the dates of their appearances.  A restaurant site could showcase specials.  A television site could give me a shot of a scene from tonight's viewings.

Hey, nice wheel motion there, Bill.

For this type of splash page to be effective, it should reward return visits in some manner, such as containing useful, interesting, and regularly updated information.

Yes indeed.

Think even of those 'Tips' windows that you get with some software on startup. Each time you open the window, you get a fresh tip that may help you to discover a feature you'd not used before, or learn a faster way of using the resource. This can translate directly toa lot of sites, and with those great ideas you listed above, there's a lot there to get people thinking about reinventing the splash page for a real use.

Another problem with multiple entry pages is that it is then tough to try to maximize the back-links.  The current wisdom is that you should even be trying to get all your back-links pointing to the same name.  So standardize on www.abc.com rather than having some back-links pointing to www.abc.com and some pointing to www.abc.com/index.htm

Barry, the man who argues with the weather, rather than dressing to suit it, is pretty much wasting his time. Your traffic is going to arrive at your deep content because that's what they want to do.

Passing and focussing your PageRank is something you control through your navigation, and by providing information for those wanting to link who are willing to take a code sample, or agree to list the whole site rather than a specific article.

However, Barry, think on this. Above (and in other posts elsewhere) you've several times highlighted an article appropriate to the topic and linked to it. Not to your homepage and told people to find it, but linked right to it.

If that's what you yourself do, then accept that people with nothing invested in the site are likely to do the same.

So, you should create the site-structure in such a way that each page links directly to its alternate language counterparts. A french search for "Weekend" and an English search for "weekend" will only return the correct language version if the user knew enough to set the preferences. There will be many occassions, I assure you, where linking the different language pages on the same topic will prove invaluable to you and your users.

This can be as simple as adding a flag icon link to denote the language, and allowing users to find the right language of the exact same content should they accidentally arrive on the wrong version (or want to send a URL to a friend who speaks a different language).

Those links all add up, and help add and spread pagerank throughout your entire site. This turns a minor problem into a seriously powerful technique that offers many advantages.

Hope there's some food for thought in there, because I really believe it would be the best thing you could do for both your users, and your marketing endeavours.

[bwelford]

Thanks, Ammon and Bill. You both bring out some excellent points.

I guess I was just trying to have my cake and eat it too. As you both are saying the priority is website visitors then SE's. Not the other way round.

[Black_Knight]

Always, Barry. The engines employ as many scientists as they can afford to build their algorithms that will (ideally) reward exactly what the visitors will anyway. The ultimate search engine algorithm attempts to emulate the feeling/rating of the visitors themselves in aggregate.

By aiming to impress, please, and serve, the visitors, you build a site that the search engine is actively trying to make its algorithms rate most highly.

[Nicola]

Can I just add what we use a splash page for on one of our sites...

We have a branding in our company which although has the same brand name, is actually 2 separate areas. Therefore my splash page leads them into a site which is from there broken into 2 complete separately run sites.
(ie: the widget company... Indoor widgets - Outdoor widgets)
The company's are both known by the same name and therefore need to be on the same site... but independently!

That's my 2 penny's worth anyway!

Nicola

[bragadocchio]

Hi Nicola,

I'm not sure I understand. Is it two separate companies, or one company with two well known products that have the same name?

[Nicola]

It's a company with 2 separate types of product that they sell.
(I don't know why I don't just say... I guess I don't want anyone nit-picking our site!)
oh well...
It's www.supertravel.co.uk
Which then separates into Supertravel Ski and Supertravel Golf. The two companies are separate, but under the same branding umberella. (There is also a third which is Supertravel Flights, but is not as heavily branded on the splash page due to other successful advertising which leads them straight into the flights section)

It works for us.
Nicola