Idiotic ATI website

J · Mar 16, 2005

Arthur Hagen said:
It's not how many clicks it takes -- it's how easy it is to *find* the link
in the first place. Especially if your system isn't like the default system
used by the unwashed masses (XP, 1024x768, Internet Explorer, no ad
blocking, small fonts), or you don't know the terminology.

When you get your first ATI card, you have *no idea* what Hydravision,
Multimedia Center or Catalyst means, and you have to know the difference to
navigate the download area, as they can't be bothered to put in even a
one-line description to aid a newcomer. Once you know it, you don't think
about it (nor do you think about why the tree view on the left doesn't work
if you happen to use IE where it does work). As for using "font size=1",
that's soo stupid I won't even go there. In 1920x1440 it's flyspeck, even
if using large fonts. Yes, users can override this, but should they have
to, or know how to before they download the driver?

Revel in your own knowledge about this, and feel superiour to the new users
who don't know all this yet. They'll quickly catch up, if they don't bump
into so many hindrances like this and attitudes like yours that they walk
away disgusted.

I'm far from a new user, but I make software *for* new users. They have
entirely different problems from what you or I may have, and perceive things
quite differently. Unnecessary complexity and "works for me" attitudes are
really really bad. While some users are smart, and most are just smart or
adventurous enough, not all of them think like a geek, and need some hand
holding and simplicity. Here, ATI fails.

The worst part is, how hard would it be to make it simple? And it's not
just this site; there are so many companies that have *utterly moronic*
websites. But in this case it would be so easy! Choose your product, give
a short overview, give me the downloads! If something that simple can't be
made utterly trouble-free for *everyone*, something's wrong.

But you make excellent points which apply for teaching or explanation in
general: many (most?) people have trouble putting themselves in the new
user's shoes.

In a way though, it all makes sense I suppose. Sophisticated web sites have
been around for only 10 years or so. It's still at the stage where things
are just thrown together by some random pothead. No real standards of
clarity or efficiency exist yet--apparently.

J. Clarke · Mar 16, 2005

Arthur said:
It's not how many clicks it takes -- it's how easy it is to *find* the
link
in the first place. Especially if your system isn't like the default
system used by the unwashed masses (XP, 1024x768, Internet Explorer, no ad
blocking, small fonts), or you don't know the terminology.

I don't notice any behavior that is different on my Linux box, using any of
several different browsers--the only one with which I had any trouble
navigating the site was Lynx and that's more because I don't use Lynx very
much than anything to do with the site itself. But if I was in a situation
in which my only browser was Lynx, I'd probably not really care very much
about video drivers anyway.

When you get your first ATI card, you have *no idea* what Hydravision,
Multimedia Center or Catalyst means, and you have to know the difference
to navigate the download area, as they can't be bothered to put in even a
one-line description to aid a newcomer.

And this is a recent change?

Once you know it, you don't think
about it (nor do you think about why the tree view on the left doesn't
work
if you happen to use IE where it does work).

It works on Mozilla, Firefox, and Konqueror too. If it doesn't work for
_you_ you should fix whatever is breaking it.

In fact in some places they have explicit checks for particular browsers and
make adjustments accordingly.

As for using "font size=1",

Where do they use this? I find no font size settings at all on the site.
Would you care to show me in the source where they set this?

Comparing the ATI site with the nVidia, Matrox, IBM, Microsoft, and AOL
homepages, using Mozilla with the default settings, I find that the text
size on the ATI site is the _largest_.

that's soo stupid I won't even go there. In 1920x1440 it's flyspeck, even
if using large fonts.

Yes, users can override this, but should they have
to, or know how to before they download the driver?

If they don't know how to adjust font size on their browser and they have it
set to a small size that's going to affect more sites than ATI. If they
can't read the ATI site then they aren't even going to be able to _see_ the
Matrox or nvidia sites. And how are they getting to 1920x1440 if they
don't have a video driver loaded?

Revel in your own knowledge about this, and feel superiour to the new
users
who don't know all this yet.

I find it interesting that you with all your experience are the one who is
having difficulties.

They'll quickly catch up, if they don't bump
into so many hindrances like this and attitudes like yours that they walk
away disgusted.

Going into the site with a brand new machine set to the defaults I have no
problems at all. It seems to me that most of your problems are either with
things that ATI did _not_ change with the new site design, or with the
configuration of your browser, and not with things that are _new_ that
actually make things difficult for new users.

I'm far from a new user, but I make software *for* new users.

If you test it using only one browser and that hosed up then God help them.

They have
entirely different problems from what you or I may have, and perceive
things
quite differently. Unnecessary complexity and "works for me" attitudes
are
really really bad.

So where would you "remove complexity" from the ATI site? Tell us how.

While some users are smart, and most are just smart or
adventurous enough, not all of them think like a geek, and need some hand
holding and simplicity. Here, ATI fails.

Here every site fails. Including yours no doubt. There is always someone
to whom the thought patterns used by the site designer are foreign.

I don't see how much clearer you can get than "Drivers & Software/Windows
XP/Radeon". Perhaps they should change "Driver download" to "click this
first"?

Paul Murphy · Mar 16, 2005

Now let's see, on the ATI site you need to know your OS, your video board,
and whether you want MMC. Doesn't seem that hard to me.

I think the problem is not that negotiating the web site is "that hard" to
anyone but that it could be much, much better through a few simple changes -
and that's annoying. For one thing, the part where the MMC 9.06 download
mentions its only for 9xxx series cards and newer and that users of previous
cards should download 9.02 has no link to 9.02. Users need to realise that
they need to move to the left frame and start navigating through that (up
until this point they hadn't needed to touch that left frame menu). Pagan
was right earlier on in the thread in that obtaining software for an 8500DV
is needlessly complex and that's not an observation about me but about the
website. I would send an email to the webmaster about it but.... you guessed
it, I cant find a suitable email address and nor can I find an appropriate
webform - wait, after about a minute or two going all around the place on
their website I finally found this page:
http://apps.ati.com/webmaster/webfeedback.html through the small grey font
"about this site" link in the small print at the bottom of the home page.
You'd think it would be under the "contacts" page but no such luck. Anyway
my feedback has just been sent to the webmaster using this method, I hope
others do the same and it may be improved as a consequence.

Paul

Paul Murphy · Mar 16, 2005

In ten more years we will be another third world nation. Trully Sad.

And George W Bush will be leading the country in that direction - starting
today!

Paul

Good Man · Mar 17, 2005

And George W Bush will be leading the country in that direction -
starting today!

relax! oil-drilling in the alaskan wildlife refuge was passed today, soon
we'll all be RICH BEEYATCH

Arthur Hagen · Mar 17, 2005

J. Clarke said:
Arthur Hagen wrote:

Where do they use this? I find no font size settings at all on the
site. Would you care to show me in the source where they set this?

Sure thing, since you either don't appear to have a working grep, or don't
know how to look at individual frames in framesets.

Line 174 (migth vary due to being a dynamic page) of the main frameset you
get to when you select "Drivers & Software" (<URL:
https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=894&task=knowledge&folderID=27>)
reads:

<a class=contentLinks href=KBSplash.asp>ATI
Customer Care</a> > <a class=contentLinks
href=KBList.asp?folderID=27>Drivers and Software</a> > Drivers and
Software<ol start=1><li class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3358>Windows XP Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3374>Windows 2000 Drivers
and Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3376>Windows 98 Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3380>Linux Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3372>Windows XP Media Center
Edition Drivers and Software</a>  <li
class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3314>Utilities</a>  <li class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3373>Windows XP 64-Bit Edition Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3375>Windows ME Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3379>Mac OS Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3378>Windows NT Drivers and
Software</a>  </ol><img
src=images/iBack.gif width=16 height=16 border=0 align=absmiddle
alt=Back> <a class=contentLinks

href="javascript:navBack();">Back said:
Comparing the ATI site with the nVidia, Matrox, IBM, Microsoft, and
AOL homepages, using Mozilla with the default settings, I find that
the text size on the ATI site is the _largest_.

Not so when using Mozilla here.

If they don't know how to adjust font size on their browser and they
have it set to a small size that's going to affect more sites than
ATI.

They don't have to have set anything -- using the *default* font sizes it's
unreadable. Even if choosing "Large Fonts" in Windows.

If they can't read the ATI site then they aren't even going to
be able to _see_ the Matrox or nvidia sites.

Wrong. None of those use font size=1.

And how are they
getting to 1920x1440 if they don't have a video driver loaded?

Windows loads a default driver, or the shop they buy it from sets it up for
them. Then they buy a game, it doesn't work, they call the hotline, and the
hotline tells them to download new graphics card drivers.

I find it interesting that you with all your experience are the one
who is having difficulties.

I'm not having difficulties, but I have experience with user design and
testing, and know a bit about what will cause problems for a typical
non-technical user.

If you test it using only one browser and that hosed up then God help
them.

I prefer to design following guidelines and let *non-developers* do testing
on a great variety of platforms. Having the developer do the usability
testing is really brain dead -- he should react to the usability test
results.

So where would you "remove complexity" from the ATI site? Tell us
how.

The front page is divided into at least a dozen different sections. That's
way too much.
When hitting "Drivers and Software" on the front page, you get a
"navigation" frame on the left that for practical purposes mirrors the frame
on the right. That's a huge waste, and is also confusing.
Then there's the subtabs. Tabs are OK. Subtabs are not, especially not
when they don't follow your navigation. You click "Drivers & Software", so
why should there be subtabs for "Customer Care Home", "online Support",
Request Support" and "My Support"? That's not sub-functions of Drivers &
Software. Neither is "Knowledge Base" and "Troubleshooter", which are
sub-sub-tabs. It's topsy-turvy, and doesn't make sense unless you read from
the bottom up.
Then there's the little arrows next to text, which look clickable. They're
not. The text is, though, although it doesn't stand out in any way. Except
inside imagemaps, where the arrow *is* clickable.
And if you figure out that the text is clickable, then you may end up in
trouble too. Fill in the search form and hit "Search" next to, and it
discards your search - you have to hit the "GO" button instead. That's
breaking with your own design, and making things complicated when you don't
have to.
Then there's the rollover menus that you have to pass to get from A to B on
the front page. That's not pretty, and can make life hard for a
non-technical user by being too complex. Say the user has clicked in the
standard browser URL field and entered www.ati.com. Then the page appears,
and he sees "Investors", and moves the mouse down to click on it. If he's
not watching crefully, he'll end up at "Find a driver" from the Customer
Care submenu instead, because it pops up and overwrites the Investors link.
If he *is* careful, but not very technical, he might move the mouse up and
down, up and down, up and down until he figures out he has to move the mouse
sideways out of the pulldown menu to get it to disappear. The pulldown menu
here adds complexity, and makes it more difficult to use links on the site,
something I'm sure wasn't the intent.

There's plenty of other examples, which you should be able to find yourself,
if you take off your Ruby coloured glasses.

J. Clarke · Mar 17, 2005

Arthur said:
Sure thing, since you either don't appear to have a working grep, or don't
know how to look at individual frames in framesets.

Line 174 (migth vary due to being a dynamic page) of the main frameset you
get to when you select "Drivers & Software" (<URL:
https://support.ati.com/ics/support/default.asp?deptID=894&task=knowledge&folderID=27>)
reads:

<a class=contentLinks href=KBSplash.asp>ATI
Customer Care</a> > <a class=contentLinks
href=KBList.asp?folderID=27>Drivers and Software</a> > Drivers and
Software<ol start=1><li class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3358>Windows XP Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3374>Windows 2000 Drivers
and Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3376>Windows 98 Drivers
and Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3380>Linux Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3372>Windows XP Media
Center Edition Drivers and Software</a>  <li
class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3314>Utilities</a>  <li class=contentBody><a class=contentLinks
href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3373>Windows XP 64-Bit Edition Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3375>Windows ME Drivers
and Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3379>Mac OS Drivers and
Software</a>  <li class=contentBody><a
class=contentLinks href=KBAnswer.asp?questionID=3378>Windows NT Drivers
and Software</a>  </ol><img
src=images/iBack.gif width=16 height=16 border=0 align=absmiddle
alt=Back> <a class=contentLinks
href="javascript:navBack();">Back</a></td></tr>

I see. So they made a bunch of nonbreaking spaces font size 1. Now where
did they make some actual _text_ that size?

Not so when using Mozilla here.

Then try it with the default settings instead of whatever hosed up settings
you're using.

They don't have to have set anything -- using the *default* font sizes
it's
unreadable. Even if choosing "Large Fonts" in Windows.

Default font sizes in what? If their site is "unreadable" then the Matrox
and nVidia sites are _invisible_.

Wrong. None of those use font size=1.

I don't care what font size they use, the fonts that appear on the screen,
when compared side by side, are larger on the ATI site than on either of
the others.

Windows loads a default driver,

Which goes to 1920x1440?

or the shop they buy it from sets it up
for
them.

So why do they need a driver?

Then they buy a game, it doesn't work, they call the hotline, and
the hotline tells them to download new graphics card drivers.

The game isn't going to work at 1920x1440 either.

I'm not having difficulties, but I have experience with user design and
testing, and know a bit about what will cause problems for a typical
non-technical user.

I prefer to design following guidelines and let *non-developers* do
testing
on a great variety of platforms. Having the developer do the usability
testing is really brain dead -- he should react to the usability test
results.

In other words you don't have a clue how your software really looks on real
world browsers other than your one hosed up copy of Mozilla.

Talk about arrogance . . .

The front page is divided into at least a dozen different sections.
That's way too much.

??? How does this affect the user? Or are you suggesting that the average
web browser can't display those sections properly?

When hitting "Drivers and Software" on the front page, you get a
"navigation" frame on the left that for practical purposes mirrors the
frame
on the right. That's a huge waste, and is also confusing.

Perhaps. It's also redundancy.

Then there's the subtabs. Tabs are OK. Subtabs are not, especially not
when they don't follow your navigation. You click "Drivers & Software",
so why should there be subtabs for "Customer Care Home", "online Support",
Request Support" and "My Support"? That's not sub-functions of Drivers &
Software. Neither is "Knowledge Base" and "Troubleshooter", which are
sub-sub-tabs. It's topsy-turvy, and doesn't make sense unless you read
from the bottom up.

I've not encountered any problem there. The default goes straight to the
drivers. Perhaps they should have another "support" tab, but that might be
equally confusing.

Then there's the little arrows next to text, which look clickable.
They're
not.

The only "little arrow" I see is next to "back".

The text is, though, although it doesn't stand out in any way.
Except inside imagemaps, where the arrow *is* clickable.
And if you figure out that the text is clickable, then you may end up in
trouble too. Fill in the search form and hit "Search" next to, and it
discards your search - you have to hit the "GO" button instead.

I don't see any "search", just "advanced search". Now it should carry over
the terms I agree.

That's
breaking with your own design, and making things complicated when you
don't have to.
Then there's the rollover menus that you have to pass to get from A to B
on
the front page.

"A to B on the front page"? You've lost me.

That's not pretty, and can make life hard for a
non-technical user by being too complex. Say the user has clicked in the
standard browser URL field and entered www.ati.com. Then the page
appears,
and he sees "Investors", and moves the mouse down to click on it. If he's
not watching crefully, he'll end up at "Find a driver" from the Customer
Care submenu instead, because it pops up and overwrites the Investors
link.

That seems to be a problem only with Internet Explorer--it doesn't occur
with Mozilla or Konqueror.

If he *is* careful, but not very technical, he might move the mouse
up and down, up and down, up and down until he figures out he has to move
the mouse
sideways out of the pulldown menu to get it to disappear. The pulldown
menu here adds complexity, and makes it more difficult to use links on the
site, something I'm sure wasn't the intent.

Might be better to put the secondary links at the bottom, but still finding
"investors" is hardly an emergency.

There's plenty of other examples, which you should be able to find
yourself, if you take off your Ruby coloured glasses.

They're hardly "ruby colored". I just seem to have a higher standard for
disaster than you do. For me "disaster" is things like your house burning
down or being diagnosed with cancer. A less than ideally perfect Web site
ranks somewhere below a cat scratch.

GTD · Mar 17, 2005

You remind of George Jetson complaining of his gruelling day

at work at which he actually had to push the button.

Hey, it wasn't that he had to push the button,,,,he had to push it
FIVE TIMES in one day. I know, I remember that episode......

BTW, I'm a State Worker, so I can sympathise with George...; p

Arthur Hagen · Mar 17, 2005

J. Clarke said:
Then try it with the default settings instead of whatever hosed up
settings you're using.

I *am* using default settings, but apparently you're not.

Which goes to 1920x1440?

No, to 2048x1536, actually, but the monitors that support that resolution
aren't too common yet. Finding 1920x1440 monitors is not hard, though. Any
quality 19" or cheap 21" would fit that description.

So why do they need a driver?

Why do *you* download a new driver?

The game isn't going to work at 1920x1440 either.

Most likely not. That's totally irrelevant here, though, as even you must
know. They will, however, try to download the driver from whatever their
desktop settings are, whether it be 640x480 or 1920x1440.

??? How does this affect the user? Or are you suggesting that the
average web browser can't display those sections properly?

It affects the user by making the page unneccessarily complex, which is what
you fscking begged for examples of.

Come to think of it, that was the straw -- your pointless trolling just to
keep a "conversation" going has now become so silly that I'm withdrawing.
*plonk*

J. Clarke · Mar 17, 2005

Arthur said:
I *am* using default settings, but apparently you're not.

No, to 2048x1536, actually, but the monitors that support that resolution
aren't too common yet. Finding 1920x1440 monitors is not hard, though.
Any quality 19" or cheap 21" would fit that description.

Using the _default_ driver or the ATI driver that comes with the board?

Why do *you* download a new driver?

Generally because I've identified a problem that I am experiencing and that
the new one is supposed to fix. Anyone who can't figure out how to find a
driver on the ATI site doesn't know enough to do that sort of diagnosis.

Most likely not. That's totally irrelevant here, though, as even you must
know. They will, however, try to download the driver from whatever their
desktop settings are, whether it be 640x480 or 1920x1440.

It affects the user by making the page unneccessarily complex, which is
what you fscking begged for examples of.

If _that_ page is "complex" I shudder to think how you would describe a
typical page of a newspaper.

What do you _want_ it to do, just come up with a menu or something, with no
content?

Come to think of it, that was the straw -- your pointless trolling just to
keep a "conversation" going has now become so silly that I'm withdrawing.
*plonk*

Fascinating. Simply fascinating.

I used to think you were a pretty sharp guy.

Paul Murphy · Mar 17, 2005

J. Clarke said:
Fascinating. Simply fascinating.

I used to think you were a pretty sharp guy.

In case my earlier post was unnoticed, feedback on the website (both
positive and negative) can be directly reported to ATI from here:
http://apps.ati.com/webmaster/webfeedback.html if people want to make a
difference, then this would be the best avenue to do so.

Paul

Idiotic ATI website

J

J. Clarke

Paul Murphy

Paul Murphy

Good Man

Arthur Hagen

J. Clarke

GTD

Arthur Hagen

J. Clarke

Paul Murphy