<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>siteIQ, Inc &#187; siteIQ Website Best Practices Research Group</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.siteiq.net/category/search/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.siteiq.net</link>
	<description>Website Best Practices</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 01:41:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index &#124; IBM.com and Cisco.com share the podium, HP.com is the largest in the land, and Dell finally gets bragging rights</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/4397/2011-siteiq-index-results-ibm-cisco-number-1-dell-gets-bragging-rights</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/4397/2011-siteiq-index-results-ibm-cisco-number-1-dell-gets-bragging-rights#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 10:00:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenna Dian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eSelling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Websites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Usability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Launches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Rankings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ca.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cisco.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dell.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hp.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ibm.com]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteiq.net/?p=4397</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The annual siteIQ eBusiness rankings just hit the airwaves. This year’s report is a whopper. 95 pages, 108 graphs – and our usual politically incorrect take on what it all means. Here’s how some of the 2011 rankings shake out. Overall Performance.  IBM.com and Cisco.com share the winner’s podium. 2011 was the year that IBM.com [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/4397/2011-siteiq-index-results-ibm-cisco-number-1-dell-gets-bragging-rights' addthis:title='2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index &#124; IBM.com and Cisco.com share the podium, HP.com is the largest in the land, and Dell finally gets bragging rights ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2011-Index-All-Rankings.png" rel="lightbox[4397]"><img class="aligncenter  wp-image-4399" title="2011 eBusiness Index Star Rankings" src="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/2011-Index-All-Rankings.png" alt="2011 eBusiness Index Star Rankings" width="550" height="219" /></a></p>
<p>The annual siteIQ eBusiness rankings just hit the airwaves. This year’s report is a whopper. 95 pages, 108 graphs – and our usual politically incorrect take on what it all means.</p>
<p>Here’s how some of the 2011 rankings shake out.<span id="more-4397"></span></p>
<h3>Overall Performance.  IBM.com and Cisco.com share the winner’s podium.</h3>
<p>2011 was the year that IBM.com transformed itself from a large, aging duckling into a swan to be reckoned with (at least above the water line). There’s been many a late night for the IBM.com team—and the “wow” factor inherent in its new design has gone a long way toward keeping it in the top slot this year.</p>
<p>It’s been many a moon since Cisco.com had its overnight makeover—but this team’s intrepid iterative design strategy keeps this site fresh and innovative season after season. Cisco.com has building a better mousetrap down to a science—and that’s why it bumped IBM.com over and shares the #1 spotlight this year.</p>
<h3>Usability &amp; Effectiveness | The best hold their own</h3>
<p>It’s no surprise that the overall winners—IBM.com and Cisco.com—also aced the usability &amp; effectiveness tests. Both teams have been busy performing some pretty substantial site facelifts over the past year—and their high wire acts paid some nice dividends.</p>
<p>CA.com, IBM Software Group and Symantec.com complete the top five usability roster. CA.com held its own (third place), IBM Software jumped into fourth (from 6<sup>th</sup>), and Symantec.com &#8212; last year’s usability darling — slipped from third to fifth.</p>
<p>Symantec.com’s fall from grace sounds like bad news for the team, but it’s actually a bit of high praise. After all, most of the Symantec.com site hasn’t really changed much over the past 36 months. That’s a virtual lifetime in Internet years. Staying in the top five is a testament to all of the hard work that went into this site’s base design and architecture. But times are changing—and it will be interesting to see if Symantec.com can keep up.</p>
<h3>Content, features &amp; capabilities | The same dance continues and Dell finally gets its bragging rights.</h3>
<p>Mirror, mirror on the wall. Which is the biggest Website of all? Once the mist in the mirror clears, you’ll be looking at HP.com. In fact, this year, HP.com succeeded in getting the top spot all to itself by bumping off its long-standing 80 pound rival gorilla IBM.com. If you squint real hard in the mirror, you’ll see Cisco.com quietly making the donuts in third place.</p>
<p>While IBM, HP, and Cisco executed their complex kabuki dances, Dell.com was busy thumping some other sites down the Index. This year, it took the top spot in the online support category after watching HP and IBM toss the winner’s baton back and forth. We’ve always challenged Dell.com’s self-proclaimed assertion that its support was the biggest &amp; best in the business. Now it’s (partially) true.</p>
<p>Subscribers can <a href="https://siteiq.centraldesktop.com/sirc/blogentry/16103578/" target="_blank">pick it up in the Library</a> right now. If you’re not a subscriber <a href="http://www.siteiq.net/siteiq-ebusiness-index/2011-ebusiness-index-rankings">you can pick up a copy from the site here</a>.</p>
<p>Subscribers <a href="http://siteiq.net/client-login">Login Here</a>. Non-subscribers can <a href="http://siteiq.net/website-services/best-practice-case-studies">learn more about The Library here</a>.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/4397/2011-siteiq-index-results-ibm-cisco-number-1-dell-gets-bragging-rights' addthis:title='2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index | IBM.com and Cisco.com share the podium, HP.com is the largest in the land, and Dell finally gets bragging rights ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/4397/2011-siteiq-index-results-ibm-cisco-number-1-dell-gets-bragging-rights/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Professional Services Websites Take 2 &#124; New rules upset the rankings. A rising tide floats all boats, but Accenture.com is at the head of the flotilla</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/4304/ibm-global-services-is-dubbed-most-usable-accenture-is-big-man-on-campus-deloitte-barely-makes-the-yearbook</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/4304/ibm-global-services-is-dubbed-most-usable-accenture-is-big-man-on-campus-deloitte-barely-makes-the-yearbook#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 21:19:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenna Dian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eSelling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Usability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Rankings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[accenture.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[deloitte.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ibm global services]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ibm.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[website rankings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[website redesign]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteiq.net/?p=4304</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And the New Winner Is… Overall: Accenture.com Usability &#38; Effectiveness: Accenture.com Content, Features &#38; Capabilities: Accenture.com Last week, we took a close look at how classic professional services Websites fare when they are put under the siteIQ microscope&#8211;and made some pretty substantial changes in the ways these Websites are measured on the siteIQ benchmarks. The net result [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/4304/ibm-global-services-is-dubbed-most-usable-accenture-is-big-man-on-campus-deloitte-barely-makes-the-yearbook' addthis:title='Professional Services Websites Take 2 &#124; New rules upset the rankings. A rising tide floats all boats, but Accenture.com is at the head of the flotilla ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>And the New Winner Is…</strong></p>
<p>Overall: Accenture.com<br />
Usability &amp; Effectiveness: Accenture.com<br />
Content, Features &amp; Capabilities: Accenture.com</p>
<p><a href="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2011-overall-performance.jpg" rel="lightbox[4304]"><img class="alignright size-thumbnail wp-image-4417" title="2011 overall performance" src="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/2011-overall-performance-150x150.jpg" alt="" width="150" height="150" /></a>Last week, we took a close look at how classic professional services Websites fare when they are put under the siteIQ microscope&#8211;and made some pretty substantial changes in the ways these Websites are measured on the siteIQ benchmarks. The net result is a much slimmer benchmark that hones in on the unique ways these companies do business on the Web.</p>
<p>Since there’s no time like the present to see the impact of these changes, we put the three professional services Websites on the siteIQ eBusiness Index through this new evaluation model. Then we published the results in a new report.</p>
<p>So how did things change?</p>
<p>A lot.</p>
<p>First and foremost, <strong>Accenture.com moved from second to first place</strong> courtesy of very strong navigational, search, and services marketing scores. Services marketing now rates a Good Practice. As important, Accenture.com&#8217;s overall usability beats all comers.</p>
<p><strong>IBM Global Services’ Website ended up in a reasonably close second place</strong>. It matches Accenture.com’s services marketing Good Practice, but took it on the chin in the navigation and search categories. Just goes to show you that paying attention to those pesky architecture and cross-site utilities can make a huge difference.</p>
<p>And how did <strong>Deloitte.com</strong> fare in a rising tide that floated all boats? Ho hum. It <strong>still</strong> <strong>ranks third and gained one star&#8211;but missed the Good Practice dock by a mile</strong>. This site&#8217;s best showing is in (yikes!) online recruiting. On the other hand, every services and corporate marketing category ranks third.</p>
<p>And what about the rest of 2012? We&#8217;re betting that IBM Global Services&#8217; slow motion revamp will start to pay dividends by the end of this year. That means that Accenture.com shouldn&#8217;t rest on its laurels&#8211;and should pay close attention to the cult of personality strategy IBM.com is rolling out.</p>
<p>More scoring details, plus new rankings and ratings, are available in our new Professional Services Report. If you already own a copy of our earlier report, a new copy is on the way to your desktop. Library subscribers can pick up their copy <a href="https://siteiq.centraldesktop.com/sirc/blogentry/15923214/">here</a> (you&#8217;ll need those pesky log in credentials). If you aren’t a subscriber you can <a href="http://siteiq.net/website-services/best-practice-case-studies">learn more about The Library here</a>.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/4304/ibm-global-services-is-dubbed-most-usable-accenture-is-big-man-on-campus-deloitte-barely-makes-the-yearbook' addthis:title='Professional Services Websites Take 2 | New rules upset the rankings. A rising tide floats all boats, but Accenture.com is at the head of the flotilla ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/4304/ibm-global-services-is-dubbed-most-usable-accenture-is-big-man-on-campus-deloitte-barely-makes-the-yearbook/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index &#124; Business Software &#124; Symantec steals 1st, Microsoft flops to 2nd, and Adobe wrestles with 3rd. Usability counts.</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/4251/symantec-1st-microsoft-2nd-adobe-3rd-usability-counts</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/4251/symantec-1st-microsoft-2nd-adobe-3rd-usability-counts#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 19:21:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenna Dian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eSelling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Global Websites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Usability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Rankings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adobe.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[microsoft.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[symantec.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[website rankings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[website redesign]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteiq.net/?p=4251</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And the Winner Is… Overall: Symantec.com Usability &#38; Effectiveness: Symantec.com Content, Features &#38; Capabilities: Microsoft.com Each business software site’s redesign over the past year has caused content and features to shrink on a huge scale. But did these diets help the sites’ usability scores? At least one Website should think so.  Here’s the rundown from [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/4251/symantec-1st-microsoft-2nd-adobe-3rd-usability-counts' addthis:title='2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index &#124; Business Software &#124; Symantec steals 1st, Microsoft flops to 2nd, and Adobe wrestles with 3rd. Usability counts. ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>And the Winner Is…</h2>
<p>Overall: Symantec.com<br />
Usability &amp; Effectiveness: Symantec.com<br />
Content, Features &amp; Capabilities: Microsoft.com</p>
<p><a href="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011INDXBIZSW00411.png" rel="lightbox[4251]"><img class="size-full wp-image-4351 aligncenter" title="2011 Business Software Star Ranking" src="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/2011INDXBIZSW00411.png" alt="2011 Business Software Star Ranking" width="454" height="145" /></a></p>
<p>Each business software site’s redesign over the past year has caused content and features to shrink on a huge scale. But did these diets help the sites’ usability scores? At least one Website should think so.  Here’s the rundown from first place to last:<span id="more-4251"></span></p>
<ol>
<li>Any Web team that focuses on site usability should put <strong>Symantec.com</strong> at the top of its watch list. This site’s usability ranking not only <a title="2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index | Enterprise Software | IBM Software is in, CA.com is out, and Oracle.com is still the biggest of them all." href="http://www.siteiq.net/3974/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-enterprise-software-ibm-software-ca-oracle">debuted at number 2 on the siteIQ Enterprise Software Index</a>, but held its number 1 position in usability while stealing first place in overall performance from Microsoft.com in the siteIQ Business Software Index. Not bad for a year’s work.</li>
<li><strong>Microsoft.com’s</strong> site reductions during its rolling redesign took a toll on its performance this year. It is still the ten-ton gorilla in the business software segment, but its third place usability ranking is pure monkey business.</li>
<li><strong>Adobe.com’s</strong> story is similar to Microsoft.com’s. It is the smallest of the business software sites reviewed—and it got smaller over the course of the year. But unlike Microsoft.com, Adobe.com brings in relatively admirable usability scores. Unfortunately, it wasn’t enough to reach any of the brass rings in 2011.</li>
</ol>
<p>There’s plenty more rankings &amp; ratings – and our take on the evaluation results – in our new <a title="2011 Business Software" href="http://www.siteiq.net/siteiq-ebusiness-index/2011-business-software">Business Software Report</a>.  Subscribers can pick up a copy in the Library. If you aren’t a subscriber you can learn more here…..</p>
<p>Subscribers <a title="Client Login" href="http://www.siteiq.net/client-login">Login Here</a>.<br />
Non-subscribers can <a title="siteIntelligence Case Study Library" href="http://www.siteiq.net/website-services/best-practice-case-studies">learn more about The Library here</a>.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/4251/symantec-1st-microsoft-2nd-adobe-3rd-usability-counts' addthis:title='2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index | Business Software | Symantec steals 1st, Microsoft flops to 2nd, and Adobe wrestles with 3rd. Usability counts. ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/4251/symantec-1st-microsoft-2nd-adobe-3rd-usability-counts/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index &#124; Networking Systems &#124; Cisco stays on top. Juniper loses #2 in Usability. HP Networking mixes it all up.</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/4149/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-networking-systems-cisco-stays-on-top-juniper-loses-2-in-usability-hp-networking-mixes-it-all-up</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/4149/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-networking-systems-cisco-stays-on-top-juniper-loses-2-in-usability-hp-networking-mixes-it-all-up#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:14:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenna Dian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Global Websites]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Usability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Rankings]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteiq.net/?p=4149</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And the Winner Is&#8230; Overall: Cisco.com Usability &#38; Effectiveness: Cisco.com Content, Features &#38; Capabilities: Cisco.com Site refreshes, redesigns, and company acquisitions. All were in play in the networking systems segment last year. Did these facelifts improve these site’s usability? Did HP’s acquisition of 3Com give the old ProCurve site a new lease on life? Here’s [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/4149/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-networking-systems-cisco-stays-on-top-juniper-loses-2-in-usability-hp-networking-mixes-it-all-up' addthis:title='2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index &#124; Networking Systems &#124; Cisco stays on top. Juniper loses #2 in Usability. HP Networking mixes it all up. ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>And the Winner Is&#8230;</h2>
<p><strong>Overall:</strong> Cisco.com<br />
<strong>Usability &amp; Effectiveness:</strong> Cisco.com<br />
<strong>Content, Features &amp; Capabilities:</strong> Cisco.com</p>
<pre><a href="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011INDXNETSYS0030.png" rel="lightbox[4149]"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4030" title="2011 Networking Systems Star Ranking" src="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/2011INDXNETSYS0030.png" alt="2011 Networking Systems Star Ranking" width="452" height="135" /></a></pre>
<p>Site refreshes, redesigns, and company acquisitions. All were in play in the networking systems segment last year. Did these facelifts improve these site’s usability? Did HP’s acquisition of 3Com give the old ProCurve site a new lease on life? Here’s the rundown from first place to last:<span id="more-4149"></span></p>
<ol>
<li>It is no surprise that networking giant and usability muse <strong>Cisco.com</strong> swept the Index awards. The site has been undergoing an iterative refresh over the past year. What is surprising is how the slight changes improved Cisco.com’s performance enough to award them 12 first place rankings—just in usability alone. Congrats Cisco.com!</li>
<li><strong>HP Networking’s</strong> inclusion on the siteIQ Index this year upset every site’s apple cart—and stole second place from Juniper.net. But did HP Networking really get second place all on its own? Let’s just say it is nice to be part of the HP.com family.</li>
<li>The site that took the greatest hit this year was <strong>Juniper.net</strong>. Despite a sweeping Website redesign (one well worth checking out), the site lost its second place position (in all major categories) and its changes failed to move its usability scores one whit. But it wasn’t all bad news for Juniper.net. Its work exposed Juniper.net as a major player in online communities—including a first place ranking for Corporate Blogs.</li>
<li><strong>Brocade.com</strong> gets the sleeper of the year award for stealing second place in overall usability from Juniper.net. Like Juniper.net, Brocade.com has been making changes to its site too. The difference is that all its latest updates actually moved the usability ball down the field. But Brocade.com hardly has time to rest on its laurels if it is going to bump Juniper.net out of third place overall.</li>
</ol>
<p>There’s plenty more rankings &amp; ratings – and our take on the evaluation results – in our new Networking Systems Report. Subscribers can pick up a copy in the Library. If you aren’t a subscriber you can learn more here…..</p>
<p>Subscribers <a title="Client Login" href="http://www.siteiq.net/client-login">Login Here</a>.</p>
<p>Non-subscribers can learn more about <a title="siteIntelligence Case Study Library" href="http://www.siteiq.net/website-services/best-practice-case-studies">The Library here</a>.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/4149/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-networking-systems-cisco-stays-on-top-juniper-loses-2-in-usability-hp-networking-mixes-it-all-up' addthis:title='2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index | Networking Systems | Cisco stays on top. Juniper loses #2 in Usability. HP Networking mixes it all up. ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/4149/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-networking-systems-cisco-stays-on-top-juniper-loses-2-in-usability-hp-networking-mixes-it-all-up/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index &#124; Enterprise Software &#124; IBM Software is in, CA.com is out, and Oracle.com is still the biggest of them all.</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/3974/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-enterprise-software-ibm-software-ca-oracle</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/3974/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-enterprise-software-ibm-software-ca-oracle#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Sep 2011 10:00:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenna Dian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Communities]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eSelling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Usability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Launches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Rankings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[best practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ca.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enterprise software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ibm software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[index]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oracle.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sap.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sas.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[symantec.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[website rankings]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteiq.net/?p=3974</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[And the Winner Is… Overall: Oracle.com Usability &#38; Effectiveness: IBM Software Group Content, Features &#38; Capabilities: Oracle.com &#160; With two companies performing complete site overhauls&#8211;and one nudging its site into place over the past year—rankings were bound to change in 2011. So which sites were the major movers and shakers over the past 12 months? [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/3974/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-enterprise-software-ibm-software-ca-oracle' addthis:title='2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index &#124; Enterprise Software &#124; IBM Software is in, CA.com is out, and Oracle.com is still the biggest of them all. ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>And the Winner Is…</h2>
<p><strong>Overall:</strong> Oracle.com<br />
<strong>Usability &amp; Effectiveness:</strong> IBM Software Group<br />
<strong>Content, Features &amp; Capabilities:</strong> Oracle.com</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/9.11BUSCOMM0101.png" rel="lightbox[3974]"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-4002" title="2011 Enterprise Software Star Rankings" src="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/9.11BUSCOMM0101.png" alt="2011 Enterprise Software Star Rankings" width="452" height="125" /></a></p>
<p>With two companies performing complete site overhauls&#8211;and one nudging its site into place over the past year—rankings were bound to change in 2011. So which sites were the major movers and shakers over the past 12 months? Which ones are the sites to watch through 2012? Here’s the rundown from first place to last:<span id="more-3974"></span></p>
<ol>
<li>This year <strong>Oracle.com</strong> retained its title as the content “big foot” on the siteIQ eBusiness Index (1)—and this footprint worked to deliver it the first place ranking. On the other hand, a broader look at the enterprise software industry shows that Oracle.com doesn’t have any room to rest on its laurels. Now it has CA.com gunning to be an enterprise software Goliath and IBM Software is upping the usability bar. To compete in the future, Oracle.com needs to up its game.</li>
<li>Incremental change was the name of the game at <strong>CA.com</strong>. That’s not to say there were any major splashes or “ta da’s”. Just a series of re-launches and endless tweaking that ended up creating a noticeable transformation. On the other hand, one look at CA.com’s scores and rankings shows that change isn’t always a good thing. CA.com lost its #1 usability ranking (dropped to third)—and is the only site that registered a net decrease in its usability &amp; effectiveness score.</li>
<li>IBM Software’s latest site redesign is part of IBM.com’s Centennial revamp that is trying to change all of the rules. Here, The IBM Software team’s hard work—and CA.com’s tumble—delivered it the first place usability &amp; effectiveness ranking and the only Good Practice rating in the group. The site’s renovation also delivered more content &amp; features—but the real story is the site’s impressive string of 13 “Good Practice” usability ratings. The fact that its online communities are now visible on the site didn’t hurt either.</li>
<li>We didn’t add <strong>Symantec.com</strong> to the enterprise software mix this year because it’s selling large, complex software solutions. We added it because the enterprise systems “big wigs” are continuing to move down market with SMB and SaaS solutions that rely on the kinds of marketing and eCommerce capabilities that have long been a Symantec.com forte. So how did Symantec.com fare when compared to its mega software brethren? On the one hand, there’s no doubt that Symantec’s content &amp; features are the size of a newt (relatively speaking). On the other hand, Symantec.com proves that small can be mighty. It usability &amp; effectiveness debuted at second place—which proves that it knows how to capitalize on every single asset.</li>
<li>In April the German giant <strong>SAP.com</strong> unveiled a ginormous make-over that is still a work in progress. But if early scores are any indication, this new site is likely to give other sites a run for their money. Within a month of launch, this partial implementation was already moving the site’s content and usability &amp; effectiveness scoring needles in the right direction. It ranks fifth to be sure—but its strong showing tells us that SAP.com will be a serious competitor within the next 12 months.</li>
<li><strong>SAS.com’s</strong> scores paint a picture of a site that is running hard to stay in place. Here, substantial corporate marketing-class additions and improved communities visibility delivered the largest increase in overall content, features &amp; capabilities scores—but burning the content midnight oil didn’t move its usability &amp; effectiveness scores one whit. It ends up in 6th place (that’s dead last) with a 50.96% score and two stars (below average).</li>
</ol>
<p><strong>There’s plenty more rankings &amp; ratings</strong> – and our take on the evaluation results – in our new <a title="2011 Enterprise Software" href="http://www.siteiq.net/siteiq-ebusiness-index/2011-enterprise-software">Enterprise Software Report</a>.</p>
<p><em>(1) Note: Oracle.com’s hardware product areas (a.k.a. Sun Microsystems hardware &amp; systems) were not reviewed for this industry segment.</em></p>
<p>Subscribers <a href="http://siteiq.net/client-login">Login Here</a>.<br />
Non-subscribers can <a href="http://siteiq.net/website-services/best-practice-case-studies">learn more about The Library here</a>.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/3974/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-enterprise-software-ibm-software-ca-oracle' addthis:title='2011 siteIQ eBusiness Index | Enterprise Software | IBM Software is in, CA.com is out, and Oracle.com is still the biggest of them all. ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/3974/2011-siteiq-ebusiness-index-enterprise-software-ibm-software-ca-oracle/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t Miss/Don&#8217;t Bother &#124; The New Intel.com</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/3911/dont-missdont-bother-intel-redesign-launc</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/3911/dont-missdont-bother-intel-redesign-launc#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:00:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenna Dian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[POV (point of view)]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Usability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Launches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adobe.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hp.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[intel.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UX]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.siteiq.net/?p=3911</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This week, we took the new Intel.com site for a spin. Let&#8217;s just say there&#8217;s more (and less) to this site than meets the eye. Kenna Dian: Don’t Bother Intel.com’s latest redesign is like buying an exotic car. It is visually striking, can be fun to drive, and has more bells and whistles than other [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/3911/dont-missdont-bother-intel-redesign-launc' addthis:title='Don&#8217;t Miss/Don&#8217;t Bother &#124; The New Intel.com ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2><a href="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/8.11-Site-Launch-Intel-home-page.png" rel="lightbox [2011inteldesign]"><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-3913" title="2011 Intel.com Website Redesign | Home Page" src="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/8.11-Site-Launch-Intel-home-page-300x287.png" alt="2011 Intel.com Website Redesign Home Page" width="300" height="287" /></a>This week, we took the new Intel.com site for a spin. Let&#8217;s just say there&#8217;s more (and less) to this site than meets the eye.</h2>
<h3><strong>Kenna Dian: Don’t Bother</strong></h3>
<p>Intel.com’s latest redesign is like buying an exotic car. It is visually striking, can be fun to drive, and has more bells and whistles than other cars on the road. But going exotic has tradeoffs. Choosing to pass on getting the full options package can leave the driving experience far less exciting than advertised. In fact, it may even break down&#8211;always in inconvenient locations. And the unique controls and design that seems edgy and innovative in the beginning quickly become confusing and irritating.</p>
<p><span id="more-3911"></span>I really want to buy Intel.com’s exotic new design. But in the end, I simply can’t afford the time, effort and resources I need to invest to make it work. Some of my biggest gripes are:</p>
<p><strong>The product content is like a Chinese dinner.</strong> There’s a nice selection of information available, but it is difficult to find anything really substantial in a single location.</p>
<p><strong>Too many things that make you go “huh?”</strong> This site presents links, link summaries, and even images, that make no sense, are meaningless, or&#8211;at best&#8211;make the visitor work to know what they&#8217;re for.</p>
<p><strong>Content below the fold is often invisible.</strong> Design misfires can make the page appear to be only one screen load when in fact there is much more. Unfortunately, this invisible content is some of the most critical for visitors wanting to buy Intel’s products.</p>
<p><strong>All Flash, no pan.</strong> One thing quickly becomes apparent while surfing this site. If you don’t have Adobe Flash Player you won’t just have a mediocre experience—you will be missing information.</p>
<div>
<p><strong>The keyword search box in the middle of the home page.</strong> Enough said.</p>
</div>
<hr />
<h3><strong>Marty:  Don’t Bother (with a couple of moments of brilliance)</strong></h3>
<p>I hate to say this Kenna, but my vote is split on the new Intel.com Website. On the plus side, this new design does a great job of pushing the whole negative design, smart search, ubiquitous videos, and mega menu balls down the field. It also had more doodads than a gourmet kitchen. On other hand, it’s also the poster child for some design decisions that should send smart teams right back to the drawing board.</p>
<p>When all of these pros and cons were added up and weighted, I ended up on the “Danger Will Robinson” side of the ledger. Here’s three reasons why.</p>
<div class="mceTemp" style="text-align: left;">
<dl id="attachment_3914" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 233px;">
<dt class="wp-caption-dt"><a href="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/8.11-Site-Launch-Intel-Wide-Screen.png" rel="lightbox [2011inteldesign]"><img class="size-medium wp-image-3914" title="2011 Site Launch | Widescreen Designs | Intel.com &amp; HP.com" src="http://www.siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/8.11-Site-Launch-Intel-Wide-Screen-223x300.png" alt="2011 Site Launch Widescreen Designs Intel.com &amp; HP.com" width="223" height="300" /></a></dt>
<dd class="wp-caption-dd">Much touted flexible designs fall apart on displays larger than 15&#8243;</dd>
</dl>
</div>
<p><strong>Intel.com joins HP.com at the forefront of a very tricky (and IMHO dangerous) design trend—flexible designs.</strong> These layouts adjust to different screen sizes and resolutions so Websites can adapt to a potpourri of different user devices and platforms. The laptop. The desktop. The tablet. The phone.  Instead of designing a Website for each platform—why not use a flexible design that can act as a “one-size-fits-all” solution? Well, one reason is that it doesn’t always work. [There's more on why in the complete review published in our Case Studies Library--see the link below].</p>
<p><strong>The name of this game is Apple, and it plays by its own rules.</strong> Here, the problem lies in the fact that Intel.com’s cool new tools rely on Flash—which is a non-starter on Apple devices.  That means Intel.com is about 150 million devices short of a Happy Meal.</p>
<p><strong>This site is harder to crack than Fort Knox.</strong>  Intel.com’s new home page is a pluperfect example of a new genre. Visual.  Edgy.  Spare. Out of the norm. Unfortunately, it also seems to operate under the premise that most visitors want to start their journey by searching for the content located inside the site. I don’t know about you, but conducting a “hail Mary” search without any road signs is my activity of last resort.  Sorry Intel. D-</p>
<p><strong>Read the complete review </strong>in the siteIntelligence Case Studies Library. If you are a subscriber, <a href="https://siteiq.centraldesktop.com/sirc/blogentry/14667431/" target="_blank">click here</a> to check it out (login required).</p>
<p><strong>If you are not a subscriber</strong> you can<a title="Best Practice Case Studies Library" href="../website-services/best-practice-case-studies"> learn more about this service here</a>.</p>
<h3><strong>Other Stuff to do:</strong></h3>
<p><strong>Learn about how IBM.com is changing up the rules </strong>in the <a title="Visions of IBM.com’s grand redesign emerge" href="http://www.siteiq.net/3740/visions-of-ibms-redesign-emerge">Visions of IBM.com’s grand redesign emerge</a> blog post.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/3911/dont-missdont-bother-intel-redesign-launc' addthis:title='Don&#8217;t Miss/Don&#8217;t Bother | The New Intel.com ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/3911/dont-missdont-bother-intel-redesign-launc/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cisco.com’s Support mega-menu raises the bar—again</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/3595/cisco-com%e2%80%99s-mega-menu-best-practice-support</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/3595/cisco-com%e2%80%99s-mega-menu-best-practice-support#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 10:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kenna Dian</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Usability]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Website Launches]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[best practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cisco.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Home Page]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ibm.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mega-menu]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://siteiq.net/?p=3566</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How Cisco.com’s mega-menu merges form with function to deliver a best practice experience When Cisco.com launched its mega-menu last year it set the best practice bar—and it was high. The mega-menu provided greater access into a large (and sometimes unwieldy) site. Its design was easy to scan and use. And, it was also attractive—which is [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/3595/cisco-com%e2%80%99s-mega-menu-best-practice-support' addthis:title='Cisco.com’s Support mega-menu raises the bar—again ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>How Cisco.com’s mega-menu merges form with function to deliver a best practice experience</h2>
<p><a href="http://siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/6.11CiscoMegaSprtBlog.png" rel="lightbox[3595]"><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-3568" title="Cisco.com Support Mega-Menu 2011" src="http://siteiq.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/6.11CiscoMegaSprtBlog-300x155.png" alt="Cisco.com Support Mega-Menu 2011" width="300" height="155" /></a>When Cisco.com launched its mega-menu last year it set the best practice bar—and it was high. The mega-menu provided greater access into a large (and sometimes unwieldy) site. Its design was easy to scan and use. And, it was also attractive—which is no small feat in a small space. In the siteIQ blog <a title="Cisco.com launches drop down mega menus &amp; fat footers" href="http://siteiq.net/1901/cisco-com-launches-dropdown-mega-menus-fat-footer">Cisco launches drop down mega menus &amp; fat footers</a>, we applauded the design and architecture of its Product and Services menu. This post welcomes the Support menu into the best practice fold.<span id="more-3595"></span></p>
<p>Last week, Cisco.com introduced a substantially expanded support panel into its mega-menu portfolio. One look from the untrained eye will see it as stuffing 10 pounds of potatoes in a 5 pound sack—a recipe for a mega-menu disaster for any site. But, support is a different animal than marketing. It is truly task-based. More access is key—the quicker the better. That requires functionality, scannability, and a nod towards popularity. This is where Cisco.com gets it—and the gold.</p>
<p><strong>Functionality </strong>| Cisco.com’s support menu didn’t just throw more links at customers. It added support links for the products and resources that customers need the most&#8211;and access to others just a click away. But the functionality that sets it apart is the support documentation and downloads search boxes, and links to open or check support cases right in the menu. That makes these features available from anywhere on the site. Now that is customer service.</p>
<p><strong>Scannability |</strong> This is actually the cornerstone to the success of Cisco.com’s mega-menu. They put as much effort into its panel design as its Web pages. Links are categorized into high-level segments using common terms. Sub-categories are separated by lines that make it easy to see where each group of links begins and ends. A bit of consumer product imagery does double-duty by helping home/home office users identify their product, while spicing up the design. Customers can find what they need (or realize it isn’t in the menu) in seconds—and support is where seconds count.</p>
<p><strong>Popularity | </strong>This is where Cisco.com’s support menu truly pushes the boundaries. The Downloads menu lists the most popular downloads <em>at the time</em>. This isn’t your Mother’s static mega-menu. Its dynamic, real-time, and addresses customer’s immediate needs. That’s real innovation.</p>
<p>If you are tasked with creating the “perfect” mega-menu and don’t have heartburn yet, you should. This implementation isn’t lightweight. It requires careful research, a rock-solid platform, and crystal clear objectives&#8211;hallmarks of all Cisco.com’s launches. This makes Cisco.com one to watch.</p>
<p><strong>Other Stuff to Do: </strong></p>
<p>Read our review of the <a title="Don’t Miss/Don’t Bother | IBM.com’s Mega-menu Launch" href="http://siteiq.net/3592/don%e2%80%99t-missdon%e2%80%99t-bother-ibm-mega-menu-launch">new IBM.com mega-menu in Don’t Miss/Don’t Bother</a>.</p>
<p><strong></strong>Subscribers can check out the detailed case study about  Cisco.com’s Support mega-menu launch in the Best Practice Case Studies  Library. If you are a  subscriber, <a href="https://siteiq.centraldesktop.com/sirc/blogentry/13800899/" target="_blank">click here</a> (login required).</p>
<p>If you are not a subscriber you can<a title="Best Practice Case Studies Library" href="../website-services/best-practice-case-studies"> learn more about this service here</a>.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/3595/cisco-com%e2%80%99s-mega-menu-best-practice-support' addthis:title='Cisco.com’s Support mega-menu raises the bar—again ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/3595/cisco-com%e2%80%99s-mega-menu-best-practice-support/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Consumer support &#8212; a horse of a different color</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/2570/consumer-support-a-horse-of-a-different-color</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/2570/consumer-support-a-horse-of-a-different-color#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2010 20:11:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Marty Gruhn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adobe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cisco]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[home/home office]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hp]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mcafee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[symantec]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://siteiq.net/?p=2570</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You'd think that all support sites are created equal. If so, you'd be wrong. Turns out that support sites that target home and home office customers are very different than those that target large enterprises. Different features, architectures, strengths, and challenges. In fact, they are horses of a completely different color.<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/2570/consumer-support-a-horse-of-a-different-color' addthis:title='Consumer support &#8212; a horse of a different color ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2><a href="http://74.220.207.194/~siteiqne/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/yellinggirl.jpg" rel="lightbox[2570]"><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-2369" title="yellinggirl" src="http://74.220.207.194/~siteiqne/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/yellinggirl-271x300.jpg" alt="" width="152" height="168" /></a>You&#8217;d think that all support sites are created equal. If so, you&#8217;d be wrong.</h2>
<p>Turns out that support sites that target home and home office customers are very different than those that target large enterprises. Different features, architectures, strengths, and challenges. In fact, they are horses of a completely different color.</p>
<p>One would think that this observation would be a no brainer. Turns out, it&#8217;s a challenge for a lot of companies &#8212; especially major enterprise players that are wading into the consumer markets, including Cisco.com and CA.com. But, well-known consumer stalwarts, such as Dell.com and HP.com, haven’t broken the technical support code either. Simple fact, “one-size-fits-all” support thinking will get you into plenty of trouble.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re putting the finishing touches on a new best practice case study report that identifies the best of the best in home and home office markets. Companies like Apple.com and Adobe.com, plus outstanding support zones at Dell Home &amp; Home Office, HP Home &amp; Home Office, Symantec Norton, McAfee Home &amp; Home Office, and Cisco Home Networking.</p>
<p>Kenna will be filling you in on some of the key details from her drive across the IT Web and her deep dives into these great sites. She tells me that the devil&#8217;s in the tricky details. Stay tuned.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/2570/consumer-support-a-horse-of-a-different-color' addthis:title='Consumer support &#8212; a horse of a different color ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/2570/consumer-support-a-horse-of-a-different-color/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Search – not your father’s Oldsmobile (anymore)</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/2325/search-%e2%80%93-not-your-father%e2%80%99s-oldsmobile-anymore</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/2325/search-%e2%80%93-not-your-father%e2%80%99s-oldsmobile-anymore#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 May 2010 15:00:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Marty Gruhn</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Navigation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Support]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adaptive keyword]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adobe.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cisco.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dell.com]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marketing optimized search]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://siteiq.net/?p=2325</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just in case you haven’t checked, search isn’t your father’s Oldsmobile anymore.  A new roster of features &#038; capabilities are changing the rules. <div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/2325/search-%e2%80%93-not-your-father%e2%80%99s-oldsmobile-anymore' addthis:title='Search – not your father’s Oldsmobile (anymore) ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://74.220.207.194/~siteiqne/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/AA036974.jpg" rel="lightbox[2325]"><img class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-2326" title="AA036974" src="http://74.220.207.194/~siteiqne/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/AA036974-197x300.jpg" alt="" width="197" height="300" /></a></p>
<h2>Powerful search capabilities have hit a tipping point. Time to get them on your five point plan.</h2>
<p>Once upon a time, search was a lot like socks. One of the basics you need to operate a well-dressed Website.</p>
<p>Search has also been pretty simple. Put out a box, fiddle with some “advanced search” explanations, spend some quality man-months meta-tagging mountains of content &#8212;  and let the rest take care of itself.</p>
<p>That is, until today.</p>
<p>Just in case you haven’t checked, search isn’t your father’s Oldsmobile anymore.  A new roster of features &amp; capabilities are changing the rules.  <span id="more-2325"></span>Features like  . . .</p>
<ul>
<li>Adaptive keyword search that allows visitors to hone in on the right term before they hit the “go” button.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Marketing optimized search that puts the right products front and center – along with the things you want visitors to do (like try or buy).</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Powerful post search filtering that quickly divides the wheat from the chaff.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>And last, but certainly not least, complete search results descriptions – instead of the truncated nonsense seen on most Websites these days.</li>
</ul>
<p>This, of course, brings up two questions. Who does it now, and who does it best?</p>
<p><a href="http://74.220.207.194/~siteiqne/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/5.10-siteIQ-features-input-options-graph.jpg" rel="lightbox[2325]"><img class="alignright size-thumbnail wp-image-2332" title="Q1 2010 Search Features Input Options" src="http://74.220.207.194/~siteiqne/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/5.10-siteIQ-features-input-options-graph-150x150.jpg" alt="Q1 2010 Input Options Who's Who" width="150" height="150" /></a>The first question can be answered by a couple of summary graphs from our new Search Master Plan.  (see <a href="http://siteiq.net/website-best-practice-reports/website-search/project-plan">more results here</a>)</p>
<p>The second?  Depends on your personal preference. Here’s my ‘must see’ list.</p>
<ul>
<li>Apple.com: adaptive search, best in class descriptions, and great marketing optimized behaviors;</li>
<li>Cisco.com: adaptive search &amp; powerful post search filtering;</li>
<li>Adobe.com: amazing marketing optimized search capabilities; and</li>
<li>Dell.com: another post search filtering powerhouse.</li>
</ul>
<p><a href="http://74.220.207.194/~siteiqne/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/5.10-siteIQ-features-output-results-summary-graph.jpg" rel="lightbox[2325]"><img class="alignright size-thumbnail wp-image-2334" title="Q1 2010 Search Results Features" src="http://74.220.207.194/~siteiqne/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/5.10-siteIQ-features-output-results-summary-graph-150x150.jpg" alt="Q1 2010 Search Results Features" width="150" height="150" /></a>Oh and one last thing. It’s time to start optimizing your search engine around your target audiences.  Like socks, you’re going to need more than one pair.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/2325/search-%e2%80%93-not-your-father%e2%80%99s-oldsmobile-anymore' addthis:title='Search – not your father’s Oldsmobile (anymore) ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/2325/search-%e2%80%93-not-your-father%e2%80%99s-oldsmobile-anymore/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Sun.com (still) aces the search best practice category</title>
		<link>http://www.siteiq.net/137/why-suncom-aces-the-search-best-practice-category</link>
		<comments>http://www.siteiq.net/137/why-suncom-aces-the-search-best-practice-category#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 17:17:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Nicole Wallens</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Search]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[best practice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sun.com]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://siteiq.net/wordpress/?p=137</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I’m always getting questions about which site has the best search capabilities in the IT industry.  For my money, the answer is Sun.com. Here’s why. Sun.com’s search design is very effective for delivering mountains of organized and logical search results because it sorts and presents information  based on common categories as well as resource type [...]<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/137/why-suncom-aces-the-search-best-practice-category' addthis:title='Why Sun.com (still) aces the search best practice category ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I’m always getting questions about which site has the best search capabilities in the IT industry.  For my money, the answer is Sun.com. Here’s why.</p>
<div id="attachment_139" class='wp-caption alignleft' style='width:306px;'><a rel="attachment wp-att-139" href="http://siteiq.net/wordpress/?attachment_id=139"><img class="size-full wp-image-139" title="sunsearch09" src="http://thebestpractice.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/sunsearch09.jpg" alt="Sun's redesigned search pages still deliver an industry best practice. Detailed content category, type, format and language filters make navigating results a snap" width="306" height="330" /></a><p class='wp-caption-text'>Sun&#39;s redesigned search pages still deliver an industry best practice. Detailed content category, type, format and language filters make navigating results a snap</p></div>
<p>Sun.com’s search design is very effective for delivering mountains of organized and logical search results because it sorts and presents information  based on common categories as well as resource type or affiliation.  Each category-specific page clearly indicates the number of results found within the category &#8212; and each list opens to display additional subcategories.</p>
<p>The “Search Help” link leads to useful, instructive information that is designed to help visitors construct a search that will yield the most relevant results. This page also includes several search hints designed to assist visitors in entering the most accurate key words or phrases that will yield the results they require.</p>
<p>Best of all, Sun.com offers an advanced site search feature under the &#8220;More Options&#8221; link that provides users with some truly unique capabilities. Users can specify that returned pages meet specific file format criteria (.PDF, XML, Text, HTML), and can also specify content written in up to 13 different languages.</p>
<div class="addthis_toolbox addthis_default_style addthis_" addthis:url='http://www.siteiq.net/137/why-suncom-aces-the-search-best-practice-category' addthis:title='Why Sun.com (still) aces the search best practice category ' ><a class="addthis_button_preferred_1"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_2"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_3"></a><a class="addthis_button_preferred_4"></a><a class="addthis_button_compact"></a></div>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.siteiq.net/137/why-suncom-aces-the-search-best-practice-category/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
<!-- This Quick Cache file was built for (  www.siteiq.net/category/search/feed ) in 0.85396 seconds, on Feb 9th, 2012 at 7:41 am UTC. -->
<!-- This Quick Cache file will automatically expire ( and be re-built automatically ) on Feb 9th, 2012 at 8:41 am UTC -->
