In my eyes, this is the perfect example of why this website needs to be redesigned. This website has had this layout since 2005. The users have grown accustomed to its layout and have learned the fast way to get to the exact content they want. This is fine, as designers we want our users to be able to get to their destination with as little hassle as possible, but in this situation, I can’t help but think that so much content is being ignored because users see no need in scrolling down or even visiting the left side of the page.

Here’s a few quick points when redesigning your own website(s):

• Spread out the most popular links
  Spreading out the most popular links will draw attention to other sections of a page and hopefully get your users more involved with other offerings you already provide.
• Move the search box closer to an area you really want to emphasize.
  The search box is easily the most sought after element on a page. Placing it close to specific section of your page is a simple and effective way to attract attention.
• Move content up.
  The closer your content is to the top of the page, the more important it appears to your users. If there is something you want to draw attention to, move it above the page fold.

I’d love to hear how you prepare for a redesign. Here’s a screen capture of the entire crazyegg heatmap test.

We run a handful of traffic software packages to help get a handle on all the different statistics incorporated with running a successful website. Google Analytics, Mint and a very simple page view counter I developed in house. Each package takes a different approach to computing unique visits:

Google Analytics declares a visit as:

Visits represent the number of individual sessions initiated by all the visitors to your site. If a user is inactive on your site for 30 minutes or more, any future activity will be attributed to a new session. Users that leave your site and return within 30 minutes will be counted as part of the original session.

“30 minutes of inactivity” seems to be the norm among a few other statistical packages I’ve used in the past.

Mint takes a different approach:

The timeframes represented in the Visits pane are independent of each other meaning that the sum of total and unique visits of the hours in a day will not necessarily equal the total and unique visits in that same day.

Confused? Me too. From what I gather, the visit is based on which ever time frame you want. Hourly, daily, weekly, monthly or yearly. And technically it isn’t a visit at all, but more a visitor per (insert time frame here). Either way, the numbers look dreadfully small and that’s never fun.

I can’t help but feel like both packages leave something to be desired. Who’s to say that if I visit the same website multiple times in less than 30 minutes or an hour, that shouldn’t be counted as a separate visit?

I always think of ebay when looking at visits. I use ebay many times throughout any given work day to get a ballpark figure on the cost of random items and the occasional dream truck. Great way to avoid GTD. My searches on ebay may be random, but I guarantee that once I leave, my interested has dwindled and ultimately my “visit” has been completed. I may return in a few minutes interested in a different product, at which point a new “visit” has begun.

So I guess what I’m getting at is that the idea of visits needs to be looked at in comparison with the information being accessed during that visit. In my opinion, a news website should probably adopt the Google approach and base their visits on a 30 minute basis. Shopping and product based websites should count a visit as the user visiting, leaving, and then returning and searching for something different.

Either way, there needs to be a standard. Hmm, that’s what this post started out to be about. I think I got a little off track. Oh Well. Later days.

stats, analytics, mint, google, ebay, standards