New GolfNow layout is Awful

[Zeppage]

The design of the new site is great if I know a specific course I want to play. But I like to compare hot deals between courses and then in different areas. The old layout made this easy to accomplish. The new layout makes this problematic and it takes more work.

For those who laud the new site due to its flashy look; I prefer substance over style...

[Psyber]

Maybe part of why I don't mind this layout is I just use the find courses near me option and just check hot deals. I rarely travel far to play considering there are at least 30 public courses within 20 miles of me. 

[Grumpter]

On ‎2‎/‎8‎/‎2016 at 8:02 PM, Zeppage said:

The design of the new site is great if I know a specific course I want to play. But I like to compare hot deals between courses and then in different areas. The old layout made this easy to accomplish. The new layout makes this problematic and it takes more work.

For those who laud the new site due to its flashy look; I prefer substance over style...

I prefer substance over style as well but the word that pops in my mind when viewing the new site, and many other site changes for other companies, is Generic not flashy.

[pumaAttack]

On 2/4/2016 at 11:34 AM, mcanadiens said:

It often seems to me that some of this is change for change's sake. Maybe the new site will grow on people with time, but I don't like it right now and am glad I rarely have occasion to use it.

 

That is rarely the case with a website change...

Old, slow architecture and outdated technologies make a lot more sense and usually are the reason for a big change.  The infrastructure of a site built 5/10 years ago can't perform fast enough with all of the javascript and what not on modern web pages.

 

The design is clean and easy to use.  Upgrade for sure, and the responsive design is a must have in 2016.  

Redesigning a website is always a pain for the users and why we don't see them often.  People like routines and habits and a new layout makes people think again and they don't like it.  

On 2/4/2016 at 2:59 PM, nevets88 said:

Great web design is hard.

 

No its not.  People adapting to change is hard.

On 2/4/2016 at 3:57 PM, Psyber said:

I find it much more modern looking and easy to navigate. 

 

Exactly, there are huge usability gains in this new design.

[mcanadiens]

1 hour ago, pumaAttack said:

That is rarely the case with a website change...

Old, slow architecture and outdated technologies make a lot more sense and usually are the reason for a big change.  The infrastructure of a site built 5/10 years ago can't perform fast enough with all of the javascript and what not on modern web pages.

Sounds reasonable, but in my limited experience with it, the new site seems slower that the old one.

 

[SavvySwede]

2 hours ago, pumaAttack said:

That is rarely the case with a website change...

Ever hear of Facebook?

2 hours ago, pumaAttack said:

No its not.  People adapting to change is hard.

Then why are there so many terrible websites out there?

2 hours ago, pumaAttack said:

Exactly, there are huge usability gains in this new design.

It displays the same information as before, now there is just less of it fitting on the screen.

[pumaAttack]

3 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

Ever hear of Facebook?

Then why are there so many terrible websites out there?

It displays the same information as before, now there is just less of it fitting on the screen.

Facebook updates all the time for performance reasons. Read their release notes.  But never judge good usability by Facebook as they are one of the absolute worst sites out there.  

Honestly?  There isn't.  Some people are still stuck in old web menus but usability has only risen in the last decade.  Are there bad sites?  Sure.  But most sites are far and away better they anytime in the past.  You just have to adapt to them.  This isn't a knock on you its how society works.  I am a user experience designer and study this a lot.  

Once a person gets used to changes, going back to the old version would be impossible   

 

[SavvySwede]

4 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

Honestly?  There isn't.  Some people are still stuck in old web menus but usability has only risen in the last decade.  Are there bad sites?  Sure.  But most sites are far and away better they anytime in the past.  You just have to adapt to them.  This isn't a knock on you its how society works.  I am a user experience designer and study this a lot.  

Sounds like we just have a different barometer for what "bad" is.

6 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

Once a person gets used to changes, going back to the old version would be impossible  

This particular case isn't about "adapting" to the new site, the controls are largely the same. The problem is they blew everything up so people can see it on their phones which dilutes the quantity of information you get get to see on your PC. Also they removed useful features like the regions to again make more space for mobile users.

[pumaAttack]

2 hours ago, SavvySwede said:

Sounds like we just have a different barometer for what "bad" is.

This particular case isn't about "adapting" to the new site, the controls are largely the same. The problem is they blew everything up so people can see it on their phones which dilutes the quantity of information you get get to see on your PC. Also they removed useful features like the regions to again make more space for mobile users.

 

Yeah, all design is subjective so we can definitely have different barometers.

 

Golfnow probably looked at their metrics and saw that mobile was growing rapidly, which is the case for all web traffic, and made the decision to give those customers a better experience.  

 

I wouldn't be shocked to see them add in more functionality as site usually have a beta release then as the site stabilizes more features are added.  They probably looked at their data and knew that February was a slow month and released now knowing they can add more features in before the summer.

[inthehole]

I like the old one because you could navigate to specific courses that were listed on the left in a particular region.

I like the new one because the Hot Deals button now makes it easier to search for those specifically. 

All in all, I prefer the old web site

[SavvySwede]

1 hour ago, inthehole said:

I like the old one because you could navigate to specific courses that were listed on the left in a particular region.

I like the new one because the Hot Deals button now makes it easier to search for those specifically. 

All in all, I prefer the old web site

You could search specifically for Hot Deals on the old site.

[inthehole]

43 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

You could search specifically for Hot Deals on the old site.

true ... but I found from time to time there were issues with it.   The new "button" seems to work better & be more reliable.

 

[pumaAttack]

3 hours ago, inthehole said:

I like the old one because you could navigate to specific courses that were listed on the left in a particular region.

I like the new one because the Hot Deals button now makes it easier to search for those specifically. 

All in all, I prefer the old web site

 

Is this different than the Map view they have now? 

I find the map view to be a great way to compare courses near me and to see what they have open.  I may not know where a course is but with the map view I can know right away if the low cost is worth the drive.

[SavvySwede]

15 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

 

Is this different than the Map view they have now? 

I find the map view to be a great way to compare courses near me and to see what they have open.  I may not know where a course is but with the map view I can know right away if the low cost is worth the drive.

The old site had all of the names of your local courses listed in a column on the left of the page. (No need to open a separate window) They were organized into regions so you had an idea of where they were before needing to click on anything or open up a map. You could also click on the name to see all the tee times/course info for that specific course.

Which reminds me of another feature lost. On the old site you could see the course info without navigating off the page by hovering the cursor over the course name.

[pumaAttack]

6 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

The old site had all of the names of your local courses listed in a column on the left of the page. (No need to open a separate window) They were organized into regions so you had an idea of where they were before needing to click on anything or open up a map. You could also click on the name to see all the tee times/course info for that specific course.

Which reminds me of another feature lost. On the old site you could see the course info without navigating off the page by hovering the cursor over the course name.

 

Have you completed their survey to leave your feedback?

It looks like they are really welcoming suggestions and comments.  Please use that if you haven't as it is crucial for the user testing phase of a release.  I wish more people left comments because its hard to know what people use and what they don't.

[SavvySwede]

1 minute ago, pumaAttack said:

 

Have you completed their survey to leave your feedback?

It looks like they are really welcoming suggestions and comments.  Please use that if you haven't as it is crucial for the user testing phase of a release.  I wish more people left comments because its hard to know what people use and what they don't.

The site was already in Beta testing for a while, I complained and then defaulted to the classic site until they recently ended that option. It's going to be permanent now.

[newtogolf]

Most businesses like GolfNow do a usability study, maintain stats or perform a user survey to see how most users interact with their site and try to ensure those elements are maintained in the redesign.  It could be that some of features were just not possible to retain due to responsiveness issues or a change in the way they manage their database.  It's also possible that you used the old site in a manner that most did not or that they deemed was not critical for the new site. 

As @pumaAttack stated, new features will be added as part of their initial release schedule and based on feedback from users.  I'd encourage you to provide feedback to GolfNow if they missing features you consider necessary to  use of their site.

[pumaAttack]

Just now, SavvySwede said:

The site was already in Beta testing for a while, I complained and then defaulted to the classic site until they recently ended that option. It's going to be permanent now.

 

No, I mean have you left your comments in the survey they have listed at the top of the site?

They have a survey and ask what features you want added.  That is the best place to voice your concern.

3 minutes ago, newtogolf said:

Most businesses like GolfNow do a usability study, maintain stats or perform a user survey to see how most users interact with their site and try to ensure those elements are maintained in the redesign.  It could be that some of features were just not possible to retain due to responsiveness issues or a change in the way they manage their database.  It's also possible that you used the old site in a manner that most did not or that they deemed was not critical for the new site. 

As @pumaAttack stated, new features will be added as part of their initial release schedule and based on feedback from users.  I'd encourage you to provide feedback to GolfNow if they missing features you consider necessary to  use of their site.

 

Yup!  They probably did extensive testing and found out what features they should keep and which features didn't make sense to spend the resources on.