Why is Amazon crazy
December 6, 2010 11:20 PM Subscribe
Why is Amazon's web design so chaotic?
I was browsing on amazon.com today and noticed that their web design on product pages is all over the place. For example:
this page versus
the same book on Alibris.
Now granted, there is more information on the Amazon page, but still: full-width text blocks interleaved with columnar sections, most everything in the same font, with little in the way of background colors, images, borders, or other compositional elements to structure the information.
As the leading online retailer, they must have decided that the design maximizes revenue. But every time I view a product page, it is confusing. I'm far from a web design snob - I think Craigslist has great design, and I generally don't like web 2.0 glitz - but what's going on with Amazon?
I was browsing on amazon.com today and noticed that their web design on product pages is all over the place. For example:
this page versus
the same book on Alibris.
Now granted, there is more information on the Amazon page, but still: full-width text blocks interleaved with columnar sections, most everything in the same font, with little in the way of background colors, images, borders, or other compositional elements to structure the information.
As the leading online retailer, they must have decided that the design maximizes revenue. But every time I view a product page, it is confusing. I'm far from a web design snob - I think Craigslist has great design, and I generally don't like web 2.0 glitz - but what's going on with Amazon?
You've described the design - but what about it is confusing for you?
posted by devnull at 11:29 PM on December 6, 2010
posted by devnull at 11:29 PM on December 6, 2010
I don't really find it that confusing. The reviews and product details are all sectioned off with borders and colored headers aligned further to the left than the text. The top section focuses on the product itself with a lot of little details to push the product (Add to cart now! 1-Click! Free super-saver shipping!) as well as push the Kindle. Pretty quickly you can see the rating and price of the book, as well as how to buy it.
posted by girih knot at 11:30 PM on December 6, 2010
posted by girih knot at 11:30 PM on December 6, 2010
As I was saying, a Greasemonkey script for that.
posted by IndigoRain at 11:31 PM on December 6, 2010
posted by IndigoRain at 11:31 PM on December 6, 2010
with little in the way of background colors, images, borders, or other compositional elements to structure the information.
All of that does give some aide to visually scanning the page, but it also adds complexity. More images to download, larger CSS files, more complex HTML. Anything that adds bandwidth without obvious benefit can be expensive when you're the largest online retailer... especially at the profit margins Amazon operates at.
Also, more complex HTML and separately fetched elements slows the page load, and page loading times are very important. If pages don't load quickly, people lose interest and go elsewhere.
Further more, Amazon's web design has become a brand identity over the years. It's changed very little/subtly and you don't throw out recognition without a damn good reason. Take a look at the Gap logo fiasco. Granted, the new one sucked in almost every way, but it wasn't helped by the fact that people liked the old one.
posted by sbutler at 11:36 PM on December 6, 2010 [1 favorite]
All of that does give some aide to visually scanning the page, but it also adds complexity. More images to download, larger CSS files, more complex HTML. Anything that adds bandwidth without obvious benefit can be expensive when you're the largest online retailer... especially at the profit margins Amazon operates at.
Also, more complex HTML and separately fetched elements slows the page load, and page loading times are very important. If pages don't load quickly, people lose interest and go elsewhere.
Further more, Amazon's web design has become a brand identity over the years. It's changed very little/subtly and you don't throw out recognition without a damn good reason. Take a look at the Gap logo fiasco. Granted, the new one sucked in almost every way, but it wasn't helped by the fact that people liked the old one.
posted by sbutler at 11:36 PM on December 6, 2010 [1 favorite]
I think it has to do with the fact that Amazon didn't start out that complex; they added all those crazy features and boxes as they went along. If they really wanted to make everything look shiny and integrated they'd have to redo the whole thing, like facebook does every 6 months. Why do that when they don't have to? People will keep using it and keep looking at every new thing they throw on there because they know that the old things are still where they should be.
posted by amethysts at 11:43 PM on December 6, 2010
posted by amethysts at 11:43 PM on December 6, 2010
I know I remember reading an article about Amazon.... A-ha! From none other than Jakob Nielsen, usability guru.
Amazon: No Longer the Role Model for E-Commerce Design
Summary: Many design elements work for Amazon.com mainly because of its status as the world's largest and most established e-commerce site. Normal sites should not copy Amazon's design. ... Paradoxically, Amazon's design may work well for Amazon itself. The company is simply so different from other e-commerce sites that what's good for Amazon is not good for normal sites.
.... Cluttered pages might work for Amazon because its users are typically long-time customers who know the features and can easily screen them out. Although first-time visitors are no doubt overwhelmed, by now they account for a tiny percentage of Amazon's revenues.
...Promoting A9 likely provides sufficient business benefits to the overall company to compensate for lost sales caused by clutter on the main site
...Amazon's position as the default place to buy books is so strong that it can afford to send shoppers off to other sites, knowing they'll return later and buy the book anyway
posted by PercussivePaul at 12:40 AM on December 7, 2010 [6 favorites]
Amazon: No Longer the Role Model for E-Commerce Design
Summary: Many design elements work for Amazon.com mainly because of its status as the world's largest and most established e-commerce site. Normal sites should not copy Amazon's design. ... Paradoxically, Amazon's design may work well for Amazon itself. The company is simply so different from other e-commerce sites that what's good for Amazon is not good for normal sites.
.... Cluttered pages might work for Amazon because its users are typically long-time customers who know the features and can easily screen them out. Although first-time visitors are no doubt overwhelmed, by now they account for a tiny percentage of Amazon's revenues.
...Promoting A9 likely provides sufficient business benefits to the overall company to compensate for lost sales caused by clutter on the main site
...Amazon's position as the default place to buy books is so strong that it can afford to send shoppers off to other sites, knowing they'll return later and buy the book anyway
posted by PercussivePaul at 12:40 AM on December 7, 2010 [6 favorites]
P.S. That article is from 2005 but it seems like it's still relevant.
posted by PercussivePaul at 12:41 AM on December 7, 2010
posted by PercussivePaul at 12:41 AM on December 7, 2010
Huh. Above the fold it doesn't look cluttered at all; it has all the purchase information right there. How much, when do I get it, what does it look like (to make sure I have the right book), click on the right bar to buy, below is other stuff I might want to buy... it's clearly a sales site. And if you're looking for specific information, info about the book, reviews, etc. you have to scroll down a ways but if you're looking for those things you're generally _looking_ for them. So I suppose all I can say is that it's not a good website for 'browsing'.
This is probably helped by what PercussivePaul quotes above - if you go to Amazon, you're there on purpose. It's not like some other sites that have to convince you to stick around, so it can just be straightforward and functional.
posted by Lady Li at 12:57 AM on December 7, 2010
This is probably helped by what PercussivePaul quotes above - if you go to Amazon, you're there on purpose. It's not like some other sites that have to convince you to stick around, so it can just be straightforward and functional.
posted by Lady Li at 12:57 AM on December 7, 2010
Huh. Above the fold it doesn't look cluttered at all; it has all the purchase information right there.
This is true if you find the book in a list of search results, but if you clicked into the book's page from another page, you don't get that nice little concise blurb. I don't mind the way the site is set up for the most part, I know where to find the features I'm interested in quickly and filter out the rest. I do wish they would put the product information closer to the top, though, before the "frequently bought together" and "customers who bought this also bought" and the reviews. Generally the first thing I want to know after the price is what year it was published, and it annoys me to have to scroll past a bunch of bullshit to find out.
posted by Serene Empress Dork at 1:08 AM on December 7, 2010
This is true if you find the book in a list of search results, but if you clicked into the book's page from another page, you don't get that nice little concise blurb. I don't mind the way the site is set up for the most part, I know where to find the features I'm interested in quickly and filter out the rest. I do wish they would put the product information closer to the top, though, before the "frequently bought together" and "customers who bought this also bought" and the reviews. Generally the first thing I want to know after the price is what year it was published, and it annoys me to have to scroll past a bunch of bullshit to find out.
posted by Serene Empress Dork at 1:08 AM on December 7, 2010
I think you're looking at it like a designer, not a customer. I find the Amazon page much easier to understand. The top section reads nicely from left to right - big picture, description and details, purchase options. If I want more info I scroll down. Easy. The Alibris page only has small pictures, an extremely abbreviated description and is consumed with purchase options (the least interesting detail for me until I've decided to purchase).
posted by zanni at 1:15 AM on December 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
posted by zanni at 1:15 AM on December 7, 2010 [1 favorite]
Point of information: how is "most everything is in the same font" a criticism? Also, how is that any different between the two sites? As far as I can see, nearly everything on Alibris is in the same font too.
To me, the two are roughly the same, neither looks particularly attractive but as others have said, Amazon is familiar to me, I know how I expect it to look.
The key difference for me is ... Amazon is simply offering more buying options. Both sites are selling the same book and "people also bought", but Amazon has "more buying choices", "is this a gift", "Amazon Student", "Kindle edition", "Two for one deal", "Customers Viewing This Page May Be Interested in These Sponsored Links", and "Formats". It's cluttered, because there are so many options. I guess that's the mark of a big organisation? There's a Kindle team demanding that the Kindle option be in its own box, the Amazon Student team which wants its piece of real estate and so on and so on.
posted by AmbroseChapel at 1:41 AM on December 7, 2010
To me, the two are roughly the same, neither looks particularly attractive but as others have said, Amazon is familiar to me, I know how I expect it to look.
The key difference for me is ... Amazon is simply offering more buying options. Both sites are selling the same book and "people also bought", but Amazon has "more buying choices", "is this a gift", "Amazon Student", "Kindle edition", "Two for one deal", "Customers Viewing This Page May Be Interested in These Sponsored Links", and "Formats". It's cluttered, because there are so many options. I guess that's the mark of a big organisation? There's a Kindle team demanding that the Kindle option be in its own box, the Amazon Student team which wants its piece of real estate and so on and so on.
posted by AmbroseChapel at 1:41 AM on December 7, 2010
Amazon's design has largely accreted in the face of A/B testing to determine whether new designs make more or less money. In this situation, with an already very successful site, almost any radical redesign will make less money.
posted by zippy at 3:35 AM on December 7, 2010
posted by zippy at 3:35 AM on December 7, 2010
Amazon's page design has grown by accretion over the years. It's a similar story to eBay. Every year or so they design some new feature like "Tags Customers Associate with This Product" that helps sell more products and they add it. Each individual feature helps sell more products, but the sum total is a very complex page. Amazon's very good at what they do and does a lot of testing, but I'm guessing the testing is more about "does this new feature add sales" than "what's the cost of adding more stuff to the page".
The Alibris comparison isn't really fair, that's a page about showing multiple sources to buy the same product. The Amazon page's purchase is to help you buy that item and, just as importantly, buy other related items.
posted by Nelson at 6:50 AM on December 7, 2010
The Alibris comparison isn't really fair, that's a page about showing multiple sources to buy the same product. The Amazon page's purchase is to help you buy that item and, just as importantly, buy other related items.
posted by Nelson at 6:50 AM on December 7, 2010
Amazon only wants you to buy the books, so there are only 3-4 "conversion" spots on the Amazon site, and they are above the fold, meaning that you don't have to scroll down to reach them.
That's all they care about, and if you look, you'll notice that the "buy know" buttons are the most coherent things on the page.
Alibris is serving up results for multiple sellers, and they get a cut no matter what. It's not just a simple conversion point, so they are probably paying more attention to information architecture.
posted by KokuRyu at 7:11 AM on December 7, 2010
That's all they care about, and if you look, you'll notice that the "buy know" buttons are the most coherent things on the page.
Alibris is serving up results for multiple sellers, and they get a cut no matter what. It's not just a simple conversion point, so they are probably paying more attention to information architecture.
posted by KokuRyu at 7:11 AM on December 7, 2010
Mod note: few comments removed - if youhave an answer to "why is Amazon's page like this" or even "why is amazon's page different from allibris'" feel free to include it
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:19 AM on December 7, 2010
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:19 AM on December 7, 2010
Amazon does tons of usability testing, both with subtle tweaks, and massive redesigns.
As a semi-frequent Amazon shopper, I can attest that their designs have changed and evolved over time. (In particular, they've played around with the toolbar and homepage a lot over the past two years)
The product pages require a lot of scrolling, which is commonly regarded as a bad practice these days. However, in Amazon's case, it works really well -- there's no tabs, subpages, clicking, or waiting. Virtually everything is on that one page.
The first "pageful" of information contains the vital stats -- a picture, the price, the overall user rating. Stuff you want to see.
The second "page" contains a list of "Frequently bought together" and "Related" items. This is one of Amazon's biggest triumphs, as the list is computer-generated by what appears to be a very intelligent algorithm. The accessories are usually things you'd actually want (ie. cameras get paired with SD cards), and the "related items" section does quite a good job of picking out competing products in the same price range. There's generally very little upselling, or peddling of useless accessories. The algorithm is intelligent enough to know not to suggest buying a TV to go along with your new HDMI cable. As they say, content is king, and Amazon's content is very good here.
Third page is a feature description, product details, shipping information. Useful stuff to have, but doesn't need to be at the top of the page. (It's also not buried at the bottom of the page or on another part of the site)
Fourth "page": User reviews. Very useful, and it has a distinctive enough layout that any mildly-experienced users will know to stop scrolling once they've "hit" it. Again, it's relevant information that most people will read, and good to have on the main product page. Newegg's site design frustrates me to no end, because you have to click through to read reviews.
Fifth page: Discussions, wishlists, communities, similar categories. This is crap, and could be eliminated. However, it's at the bottom of the page, so it can be safely ignored. Some people evidently like this feature, and Amazon have kept it for their benefit. The rest of us can just ignore it. It's unobtrusive.
Beyond the product page, Amazon's new(ish) "Recently Orders" page is great. The decision to include thumbnails of the items you bought was outright inspired, and it provides a great heads-up view of your recent purchasing activity that is both concise and thorough.
My only major complaint is that Amazon's search feature sucks.
posted by schmod at 7:53 AM on December 7, 2010
As a semi-frequent Amazon shopper, I can attest that their designs have changed and evolved over time. (In particular, they've played around with the toolbar and homepage a lot over the past two years)
The product pages require a lot of scrolling, which is commonly regarded as a bad practice these days. However, in Amazon's case, it works really well -- there's no tabs, subpages, clicking, or waiting. Virtually everything is on that one page.
The first "pageful" of information contains the vital stats -- a picture, the price, the overall user rating. Stuff you want to see.
The second "page" contains a list of "Frequently bought together" and "Related" items. This is one of Amazon's biggest triumphs, as the list is computer-generated by what appears to be a very intelligent algorithm. The accessories are usually things you'd actually want (ie. cameras get paired with SD cards), and the "related items" section does quite a good job of picking out competing products in the same price range. There's generally very little upselling, or peddling of useless accessories. The algorithm is intelligent enough to know not to suggest buying a TV to go along with your new HDMI cable. As they say, content is king, and Amazon's content is very good here.
Third page is a feature description, product details, shipping information. Useful stuff to have, but doesn't need to be at the top of the page. (It's also not buried at the bottom of the page or on another part of the site)
Fourth "page": User reviews. Very useful, and it has a distinctive enough layout that any mildly-experienced users will know to stop scrolling once they've "hit" it. Again, it's relevant information that most people will read, and good to have on the main product page. Newegg's site design frustrates me to no end, because you have to click through to read reviews.
Fifth page: Discussions, wishlists, communities, similar categories. This is crap, and could be eliminated. However, it's at the bottom of the page, so it can be safely ignored. Some people evidently like this feature, and Amazon have kept it for their benefit. The rest of us can just ignore it. It's unobtrusive.
Beyond the product page, Amazon's new(ish) "Recently Orders" page is great. The decision to include thumbnails of the items you bought was outright inspired, and it provides a great heads-up view of your recent purchasing activity that is both concise and thorough.
My only major complaint is that Amazon's search feature sucks.
posted by schmod at 7:53 AM on December 7, 2010
I'm rather late to the party, but I wanted to add one thing. Not only does Amazon do a lot of usability testing as schmod mentions, they make very aggressive use of A/B testing across the site (that Wikipedia article even says they "pioneered its use within the web ecommerce space"). Their systems don't just handle conventional cases where they change one thing on one page and see how users behavior changes on that single page. Rather, they can handle dozens of experiments at once across the entire site and measure the results in terms of revenue, time on site, page load time, clicks followed, and many other metrics. They can also see how consistent changes work with the same user over a period of time, to analyze cases where someone returns to a product page a few times before making a purchase. So they can roll out, say, a new recommendation engine to a small random sample of users and test what that does to overall sales volume. Or learn that one layout works best for visitors who arrive at a product page from an external search engine, but another works best when people arrive from a search on Amazon.com. They run these kinds of experiments before changing virtually anything user-facing on the site.
This is great on the one hand, because, hey, it's science! But on the other hand, it means the site's design is much more experimentally derived than aesthetically designed. This kind of thing can drive designers mad (in the linked article, a designer wasn't altogether pleased at the fact that Google tested 41 shades of blue to see which one performed better instead of going with the one he preferred aesthetically or that he had to justify the width of a border with experimental data), which leads to the unusual design approach that is the Amazon.com product page.
Or, to put it another way, if Amazon believes the design maximizes revenue, they will stick with it unless there is darn good reason to do otherwise, and Amazon has a lot of data to demonstrate that this particular design is very good for its sales performance.
posted by zachlipton at 10:20 AM on April 12, 2011
This is great on the one hand, because, hey, it's science! But on the other hand, it means the site's design is much more experimentally derived than aesthetically designed. This kind of thing can drive designers mad (in the linked article, a designer wasn't altogether pleased at the fact that Google tested 41 shades of blue to see which one performed better instead of going with the one he preferred aesthetically or that he had to justify the width of a border with experimental data), which leads to the unusual design approach that is the Amazon.com product page.
Or, to put it another way, if Amazon believes the design maximizes revenue, they will stick with it unless there is darn good reason to do otherwise, and Amazon has a lot of data to demonstrate that this particular design is very good for its sales performance.
posted by zachlipton at 10:20 AM on April 12, 2011
« Older Sometimes It's Sweet. Sometimes It's Sour! | Transferring Small Amount of Money from US to... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by IndigoRain at 11:28 PM on December 6, 2010