Overall: Symantec.com
Usability & Effectiveness: Symantec.com
Content, Features & 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 first place to last:

1. Any Web team that focuses on site usability should put Symantec.com at the top of its watch list. This site’s usability ranking not only debuted at number 2 on the siteIQ Enterprise Software Index, 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.
2. Microsoft.com’s 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.
3. Adobe.com’s 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.

There’s plenty more rankings & ratings – and our take on the evaluation results – in our new Business Software Report.  Subscribers can pick up a copy in the Library. If you aren’t a subscriber you can learn more here…..

Subscribers Login Here.
Non-subscribers can learn more about The Library here.

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 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–always in inconvenient locations. And the unique controls and design that seems edgy and innovative in the beginning quickly become confusing and irritating.

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:

The product content is like a Chinese dinner. There’s a nice selection of information available, but it is difficult to find anything really substantial in a single location.

Too many things that make you go “huh?” This site presents links, link summaries, and even images, that make no sense, are meaningless, or–at best–make the visitor work to know what they’re for.

Content below the fold is often invisible. 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.

All Flash, no pan. 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.

Marty:  Don’t Bother (with a couple of moments of brilliance)

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.

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.

Intel.com joins HP.com at the forefront of a very tricky (and IMHO dangerous) design trend—flexible designs. 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].

The name of this game is Apple, and it plays by its own rules. 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.

This site is harder to crack than Fort Knox.  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-

Read the complete review in the siteIntelligence Case Studies Library. If you are a subscriber, click here to check it out (login required).

If you are not a subscriber you can learn more about this service here.

Other Stuff to do:

Learn about how IBM.com is changing up the rules in the Visions of IBM.com’s grand redesign emerge blog post.

2011 is turning out to be the age of the home page. We’re seeing updates in record numbers– and some designs are actually breaking new ground. On the other hand, few of these designs are actually making it down to lower levels of the site—which is a big no-no in our book.

I’ll leave that point for a future rant. Meanwhile, let’s take a look at who’s producing these new home pages, the important design points and strategies they bring to the party—and explore the age-old question: why only the home page?

I’ll start with the “who” and “how” and leave my humble opinions for the end.

Juniper.net: An end-to-end refresh, plus a savvy F1. Design-wise, Juniper.net’s boasting a more monochromatic color palette these days that’s carried across the entire site. This attention to detail isn’t much of a surprise.  Juniper.net is one of few sites that is persistently refreshed from top to bottom and end to end.

But the real feather in Juniper.net’s cap is its deft F1 feature, which features its CTO in a series of inline videos discussing the issues and questions important to potential buyers. Think of it as the first home page that actually tells a complete story.

Level3.com: A top to bottom redo–but the home page is a bridge too far.  Level3.com’s claim to fame is actually a complete Website redesign—different layout, colors, and content approach.

Like Juniper.net, the new Level3.com home page F1 centers on addressing common questions—with a huge focus on differentiating Level3 from its competitors.  How it achieves this, however, is different. Instead of using execs or employees (a la Juniper.net) Level3.com opts for three fictitious characters who step in to discuss questions selected by the visitor. The feature is professionally done, but doesn’t feel as authentic as Juniper.net’s.

HP.com: Watching an interesting design wander off the rails. I wrote about HP.com’s new and evolving home page in our most recent Don’t Miss/Don’t Bother column, so I won’t bore you with a second rendition of who shot John.  With two Don’t Bother votes, there’s plenty to learn from HP.com’s home page launch.

SAP.com: A home page design that is as revolutionary as it is attractive. This re-design tips all the previous home page and Website architecture designs on their heads.  To learn more about this launch, read my blog about how SAP.com’s home page re-defines Website architecture. Let’s just say it’s not for the faint of heart—and will require a complete site revamp to pull it off.

IBM.com: Playing catch up, but moving in the right direction. IBM.com’s latest home page redesign is a bit like watching a launch in slow motion.  This transformation started this spring with the addition of a fat (and I mean fat) footer, a slightly darker palette, savvy graphics, and an inline mega menu that allows visitors to drill down into the Smarter Planet zone (read my POV on this great zone here).  Last week, we saw IBM.com’s take on the mega-menu revolution.  My POV?  Eh. Check our latest Don’t Miss/Don’t Bother review.

Microsoft.com: Back to the future.  Microsoft.com’s new home page is interesting. The layout has changed, but the colors remain the same—which makes it look like a lightweight redesign. It’s not.

In a turn away from the trends, all mega-menu style navigation is out—and static (pull down) navigation is in.  Also new:  site information organized in colorful decks instead of floating in space.  Not better or worse—just different.

Adobe.com: Variations on the theme clobbers consistency.  Adobe.com’s new design keeps its graphically rich heritage, but does away with the impressive flash animations. Is this a response to the recent backlash against Flash, or just Adobe.com maturing? Hard to tell.

Other changes include a darker color palette and a page shift from the left to the center. The latter may seem like no big deal, but it is affecting overall site consistency due to lower-level pages that still display a flush-left design.

The Gist

So, why are we seeing so many new home pages? Well, when you can’t afford a facelift, buy some better makeup.  But here’s the catch. A redo might give you a feel good boost and bragging rights with your execs, but if your lower-level pages are aging badly this isn’t money well spent.

Why?  Because a home page is only a fraction of the user equation.  In the real world, most of your visitors spend their quality time inside your site—wandering through those aging designs, navigation structures, and dreadful content you are ignoring.  That’s not the promise these cool new home pages are selling. Which means you just invested in an expensive game of bait and switch.

Your support site is supposed to be the fount of knowledge for your customers—and a way to prove your excellence to prospects engaged in the buying process. It’s there to solve your customer’s problems. Speed them the information they need. Show them how to use your product. Make all of the wrongs with your product right.

Since happy customers are the cornerstone of successful companies, it would make sense that support sites would be laser focused on sending all of the right messages – right? Wrong. Most are actually sending plenty of wrong messages – and what they are really saying is startling.

Message: Customers = walking wallets | When customers hit your support site, they are working in a single reality: your product is broken and they want you to fix it fast – and preferably for free. The last thing they want to see is a laundry list of expensive support services. And unless you are fixing their problem, they don’t want to see this information along the click stream either. In fact, front & center support services really tell customers what they don’t want to hear: that you expect them to open their wallets because the product you sold them doesn’t work. It’s also a great way to remind them that the next time they purchase your product they are likely to be nickeled & dimed them to death.

Message: You’re part of the “in crowd” — or maybe you’re not | Too many support sites think it’s cool to put the “top” answers for their “top” products front & center on the support home page. It’s a real boon for the ‘in crowd” who bought a really popular product that seems to be constantly broken in five or ten ways. All of the unpopular kids, on the other hand, will have to pay to play. Some will pay in time while they wade through mountains of unfiltered results. Others will pay in treasure when they have to slap down their credit card to buy support services they didn’t know they would need.

As it turns out, playing the “top ten” game fares best with prospects who are considering buying one of the cool products on your list, since it tells them they’ll have easy access to answers for their problems. Those looking to buy a not so popular product? They can hold out hope that their future problem will be a popular one. Of course, if it’s that popular, it’s probably a good reason not to buy.

Message: Don’t fix it, buy a new one | My favorite way to make a bad impression comes from companies that use a big chunk of support real estate to peddle their latest product release. Think of it as a form of “watch the birdie” where companies distract users from the fact that real support resources are in short supply, and finding support for previous versions is going to require a shovel. That is, of course, before some customers find out that their “old” product isn’t supported at all.

I can’t figure out why companies operating support sites keep sending these messages to current and future customers. They make current users feel like they have to pay premium prices for a one minute answer – which inevitably sends them into the arms of the (unvarnished) Internet to get results. Meanwhile prospects get a couple of messages that most companies don’t intend to send. It puts all of problems with the “cool” products front & center, which suggests that even more is broken in the wings. As important, it says that support will be readily available as long as another product doesn’t enter the limelight. After that they’ll get the same treatment as the customers who were foolish enough to buy a product last year.

Smart companies recognize that support isn’t just a break/fix moment. It is a key a part of the buying process. When support is done right, prospects will become customers, and customers will become repeat customers.

Which brings me to my question. What messages are you sending on your support site? Are they the messages you want your customers to hear?

Powerful search capabilities have hit a tipping point. Time to get them on your five point plan.

Once upon a time, search was a lot like socks. One of the basics you need to operate a well-dressed Website.

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 —  and let the rest take care of itself.

That is, until today.

Just in case you haven’t checked, search isn’t your father’s Oldsmobile anymore.  A new roster of features & capabilities are changing the rules.  Features like  . . .

• Adaptive keyword search that allows visitors to hone in on the right term before they hit the “go” button.

• Marketing optimized search that puts the right products front and center – along with the things you want visitors to do (like try or buy).

• Powerful post search filtering that quickly divides the wheat from the chaff.

• And last, but certainly not least, complete search results descriptions – instead of the truncated nonsense seen on most Websites these days.

This, of course, brings up two questions. Who does it now, and who does it best?

The first question can be answered by a couple of summary graphs from our new Search Master Plan.  (see more results here)

The second?  Depends on your personal preference. Here’s my ‘must see’ list.

• Apple.com: adaptive search, best in class descriptions, and great marketing optimized behaviors;
• Cisco.com: adaptive search & powerful post search filtering;
• Adobe.com: amazing marketing optimized search capabilities; and
• Dell.com: another post search filtering powerhouse.

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.

We’ve mixed up the siteIQ eBusiness Index for 2010. In some cases the decision was based on eliminating Websites that haven’t improved over the past year and don’t provide any good or best practices worth tracking. In other cases, sites have fallen off our list because they don’t exist anymore. That would be EDS.com which was integrated into HP.com — and Sun.com which went off the airwaves last week.

In both cases, these sites are a loss to anyone who cares about good and great practices. Don’t bother to follow them to their new homes. Their presence inside of their new parent’s sites is nothing to write home about.

Here’s some more about the new sites added to our roster – and why we’re singing “auld lang syne” to others. (If you are a siteIQ client you can read more about what we expect from these and other leading sites in 2010 in our new executive brief in the siteIntelligence Research Center).

IBM Software Group (zone): We’ve been evaluating and tracking IBM.com’s software zone for years as part of our custom client programs. This year it’s time for this zone to move onto the eBusiness roster. It should be interesting to see how this aging and oft cluttered design fares against competitors who are adopting new, highly efficient designs and Web 2.0 features that play directly to the B2B buying process. Don’t even get me started about communities — which are a blooming mess (tag: enterprise software)

SAS: We decided to replace Microsoft’s Dynamics zone with SAS.com this year for a simple reason. We’ve been tracking Microsoft’s enterprise software zone for years under the assumption that it would eventually figure out how to sell to large enterprises and step up to equal footing with the big boys. That never happened. This zone has been a step-child on this site from the get-go and it’s essentially invisible today. This year we decided to take off our miner’s helmets and replace this zone with SAS.com.

The case for SAS.com comes more from its industry presence than its Website footprint. It’s a perfectly mediocre site that seems to have missed the memos on Web 2.0 and social media marketing behaviors. If nothing else, it should be interesting to see how it stacks up against the other big boys in the enterprise software industry. If you are looking for a new leader though, I wouldn’t hold my breath. (tag: enterprise software)

EMC.com: EMC.com is new to our roster in 2010 and we’ve put it in the enterprise systems category. It’s a bit of an odd fit, but we think this is the segment that best matches its strategy and focus. Needless to say, EMC.com has come a long way over the past few years and it’s another example of a site that is maximizing Web 2.0 elements and creating standards for high impact designs. From a first blush perspective, it’s a small but mighty site in the spirit of Adobe.com.  It will be interesting to see where the site excels – and where it misses the mark in 2010. (tag: enterprise systems)

Sun.com: Last week, Sun.com went off the airwaves and was stuffed into a few pages on the Oracle.com site. Thus, ends the life of one of the IT industry’s most innovative and useful Websites.

To see why, let’s look at just a few of Sun.com’s industry “firsts.” It pioneered communities on the Web; embraced Web 2.0 when it was just a spec on the horizon; was the first to deploy tab top designs to consolidate content into manageable bites; automatically discounted prices in its (public) ecommerce system based on the customer’s contractual relationship; pioneered dashboards that allowed customers to customize information to their needs: operated the industry’s largest (java.com) and most diverse range of developer portals; and designed the industry’s first contextual search engine that organized results by objective, type, or role. Oh, and one thing else. It did all of this while ranking #1 in usability over the past 6 years.

All in all, a stellar run for the record book. It’s too bad that the company’s business strategy (and the CXOs that ran it) weren’t as effective as this site.

Intel.com: Intel.com is one of the industry’s most interesting studies because it marches to the tune of a truly unique drummer. Instead of marketing Intel’s products and services with sales as the end game, this site is focused on conditioning markets to prefer (and preferably demand) products built on Intel technologies — and then reward companies that sell Intel-based products by driving buyers directly to their Websites or retail stores. In simple terms, Intel.com isn’t chartered to sell Intel’s chips; it’s responsible for making sure that Intel is the buyers’ preferred brand.

From this perspective, Intel.com has always been one of few pure play ‘brand’ Websites. It’s also one of the first sites to effectively harness communities and Web 2.0 behaviors to start a conversation with users and buyers. For these and other reasons, we’re glad to welcome Intel.com to the 2010 eBusiness Index. May the best brand player win.

Brocade.com: Has anyone else noticed that the network systems industry is consolidating like a cardboard box in the rain? If not, spend some quality time looking for a fourth network systems Website (we also evaluate Cisco.com, Nortel.com and Juniper.net twice a year.  that has any best practices and is larger than a newt. After we spent some quality time considering the candidates, we flipped a coin between Brocade.com and Enterasys.com. Brocade.com won the toss.

We’ve got some real hope for Brocade.com in 2010 since it boasts a bevy of Web 2.0 behaviors, uses the same mega-menus as Juniper.net, and operates communities that show some promise. Of course, the devil’s in the details. Stay tuned for the results from our first evaluation which will be available in Q2 2010. (tag: network systems)

Deloitte.com: Deloitte’s inclusion on the 2010 eBusiness Index roster is due, in large part, to EDS.com riding into the sunset. Quite frankly, we’re glad to have a reason to shake up the professional services sites we cover. Most of them have been skating on the innovation and design fronts for too many years.

Deloitte provides a much needed breath of fresh air to our professional services roster. It’s built on a well crafted design and its lively first person voice takes much of the voodoo out of the consulting services conversation. All in all, we expect Deloitte.com to raise the bar for Accenture.com, and especially IBM Global Services. It should be interesting to see how those sites stack up now that there’s a new deputy sheriff in town.  (tag: professional services)

Here’s the rest of the sites we’ll be evaluating in 2010. If you are a siteIQ client, you can read more about these sites’ strengths and challenges in our new executive brief in the siteIntelligence Research Center.

• Adobe.com
• Microsoft.com
• Symantec.com
• CA.com
• Oracle.com
• SAP.com
• Dell.com
• HP.com
• IBM.com
• Cisco.com
• Nortel.com
• Juniper.net
• CDW.com
• Insight.com
• NewEgg.com
• Accenture.com
• IBM Global Services (zone)

What do you think of these sites? Sound off in comments

This brings me to my tale of woe – and why Adobe deserves kudos for a job well done. Recently my trusty laptop lost his mind and wiped out my profile (thanks a bunch, Microsoft). Although we were able to get him up and running again, my digital buddy emerged with a serious case of amnesia. While he was in triage, I renewed a relationship with a old friend from my distant past—my desktop system. However, renewing this friendship was not without its pitfalls. I had to perform the painful task of reloading all of my software.Visions of long, tedious waits on the phone with repeated recounts of my story  stretched out before me like a vast wasteland.

Enter Adobe…

Having started my reload process with some other companies’ software (which shall remain nameless), I was fully expecting to re-live the frustrating experience of hidden serial numbers, missing purchase histories, and dead-end authentication processes with my Adobe products. Imagine my surprise when none (I repeat, none) of these things happened.

Knowing it was a long shot, I decided to start by grabbing my serial number off of the Adobe software that had not been vaporized on my laptop. As my serial number emerged on my screen, I giggled with glee. One major piece of the puzzle down. But, I knew this small victory was far from winning the war. I still had to face the dreaded authentication process.

After entering my Adobe serial number, I was indeed foiled again. It was an upgrade serial number for software that was so old that it was probably still afraid of Y2K. Knowing that I no longer had this software packaging (much less which version it was), I was prepared to face the inevitable blank purchase history page on the Adobe.com Website. Upon logging in, I was amazed—no stunned—to find my I entire purchase history on the Website—complete with all serial numbers. At this point, the clouds parted and blue skies were visible. But the final question was still left unanswered. Would the authentication process allow me to enter my ancient serial number, or would I have to face an hour on hold listening to bad jazz?

I entered the serial number for my existing software and let the authentication progress bar roll. A screen emerged asking for the previous product and serial number. I hit enter and held my breath as I watched another progress bar scroll. Suddenly, a golden menu box displayed, accompanied by angels singing and a message that my numbers had been accepted. I was free to proceed, unfettered, with any tasks my software could handle—and I didn’t have to listen to a single note of bad jazz.

siteIQ View | The moral to this story? There are some bad eggs who steal software, but that isn’t most customers. As important, most customers are willing to jump through the necessary hoops to prove that they have purchased software legally. Nevertheless, sometimes life happens and they don’t have the tools available to give companies  the evidence they need. But if companies are willing to give customers a safety net or two—such as the software’s serial number, or access to their purchase histories—they will jump through the hoops with wonderful grace and everyone will be happy. No mundane calls from  customers that rack up support costs — and no bad phone muzac for customers stuck on hold, In other words, a perfect win/win.

Kudos | Congratulations to Adobe for an excellent on-board product authentication experience. Adobe and Adobe.com gave me all the tools I needed to get my software up and running in no time flat. This is exemplary considering I still have software (which was legally purchased—TYVM!) that can’t be installed, despite my best efforts. But that’s another war for another day. Hopefully, some of those companies  will see themselves in this blog and take a page from Adobe’s integrated online support playbook. If they don’t, I’m likely to buy new software from someone else.

Insight.com and Newegg.com both receive scores that place them in a league with IT industry leaders — and well ahead of one of their major partners — HP.

When I rolled up the first quarter 2008 usability numbers this week, a couple of interesting facts jumped out. First, Newegg.com’s product marketing score is nearly 71%, which puts it on par with the eBusiness Index average (71.38%) — and places it in close proximity to enterprise systems heavyweights in the effectiveness rankings. Second, and more important, all three reseller sites — Newegg.com, CDW.com, and Insight.com — earn e-selling-related usability scores that are well above the eBusiness Index average, and actually rival those of the ultimate online channel — Dell.com.

Admittedly, these are two bright spots in an otherwise checkered usability landscape for these companies.  Website design and navigation & architecture scores average around 60% — well below the target 75% score. Corporate marketing comes in at an embarrassing 44%, and services marketing & support scores sit in the mid 30% range. To add insult to injury, these sites clock equally appalling training & education scores that average around 30%. Community/industry marketing scores are the true disappointment, however. Here, the mean usability score doesn’t even crack 25%. So much for Web 2.0 among leading reseller sites.

Despite these bumps in the road, I have to give the teams managing Newegg.com, CDW.com, and Insight.com credit for focusing on “Job One” in their universe: making products easy for visitors to purchase online, and delivering persistent call to action elements that encourage visitors to become customers. These behaviors, combined with competitive pricing that often meets or beats the manufacturer’s suggested retail price, are undoubtedly partially responsible for the growing popularity of these (and other) reseller sites.

It’s my contention, however, that the real reason these sites are selling record numbers of their partner’s/supplier’s products is an architectural structure that facilitates forward momentum based on customer specifications and/or requirements. At these sites, visitors dictate the context in which they view products, and no matter the route taken, pricing and the ability to begin the purchasing process are central elements of the click stream. In fact, in contrast to some enterprise-class sites where purchasing the exact same product often requires navigational gyrations through  mountains of poorly organized content, these leading reseller sites make online purchasing a breeze.