Website design survey

On the 30th December 2010 we carried out a small scale survey and test of professional web design companies.

A Google UK search was initiated with the term ‘professional web design companies’
The websites in that first Google page are listed below.
None have been chosen to prove a point, they appear in the same order as they appeared in Google and none have been excluded.

Spring Digital appeared in the Prime paid advert slot, all others were the normal search results, and Boundary Products Web Design has been included as a bench mark:

These results speak for themselves.
Obviously this was a snap shot and the figures may be different in the future, so you can access any of the test and validation sites free of charge and conduct your own experiments.

Test for Accessibility and W3C Standards compliance issues (both on same page).

Test for mobile friendliness.

Cardboard box with Add-ons label

[1] Accessibility – now a legal requirement.

This is an initial Accessibility machine test –

A NOT IMPLIMENTED outcome is 0% to 39%.
A PARTIALLY IMPLIMENTED outcome covers a huge percentage area from 40% to 94%.
An ALMOST COMPLETE outcome is 95 to 99% which shows the potential for a good Accessibilty foundation.
A PASS is good but does not guarantee a pass after secondary manual tests, but is a good start: (Tested at fae.cita.uiuc.edu/)

  • Spring Digital: PARTIALLY IMPLIMENTED: 60%
  • Empire Elements: PARTIALLY IMPLIMENTED: 80%
  • All Web Services: PARTIALLY IMPLIMENTED: 40%
  • Web Creation UK: NOT IMPLIMENTED: 20%
  • Mass Media Design: PARTIALLY IMPLIMENTED: 80%
  • Addictivity: PASS: 100%
  • Real Works Media: PARTIALLY IMPLIMENTED: 60%
  • Clare Web Design: PARTIALLY IMPLIMENTED: 60%
  • Digital Flare: PARTIALLY IMPLIMENTED: 40%
  • Boundary Products Web Design: PASS 100%

[2] Speed optimisation.

Quick loading pages are essential to keep people on your website – the larger the k weight, the slower the page will load: (Tested at websiteoptimization.com)
Below 100k is excellent, below 200k is okay, below 500k poor, over 500k very poor:

  • Spring Digital: VERY POOR: 1869k
  • Empire Elements: POOR: 340k
  • All Web Services: VERY POOR: 1287k
  • Web Creation UK: VERY POOR: 1566k
  • Mass Media Design: VERY POOR: 593k
  • Addictivity: POOR: 372k
  • Real Works Media: VERY POOR: 1060k
  • Clare Web Design: VERY POOR: 653k
  • Digital Flare: POOR: 466k
  • Boundary Products Web Design: EXCELLENT 82k

[3] W3C validation tests for coding errors and compliance with International web standards.

No errors makes for a good future-proof design: (Tested at validator.w3.org/)

  • Spring Digital: FAILED: 21 errors
  • Empire Elements: FAILED: 12 errors
  • All Web Services: FAILED: 8 errors
  • Web Creation UK: PASSED
  • Mass Media Design: FAILED: 11 errors
  • Addictivity: FAILED: 16 errors
  • Real Works Media: FAILED: 23 errors
  • Clare Web Design: PASSED
  • Digital Flare: FAILED: 15 errors
  • Boundary Products Web Design: PASSED

We now use the latest html5 but unfortunately the W3C Validator gives an error because it does not support external namespaces, so no modern HTML5 page will validate! See external link validate.
It's a limitation of the W3C validator.

[4] Mobile device friendly.

This is a Mobile friendliness machine test carried out at validator.w3.org/mobile/ The closer to 100% the more mobile friendly the page:

  • Spring Digital: VERY POOR: 41%
  • Empire Elements: SEVERE FAILURE: 34%
  • All Web Services: CRITICAL FAILURE: 0%
  • Web Creation UK: CRITICAL FAILURE: 0%
  • Mass Media Design: VERY POOR: 51%
  • Addictivity: POOR: 62%
  • Real Works Media: CRITICAL FAILURE: 0%
  • Clare Web Design: VERY POOR: 44%
  • Digital Flare: CRITICAL FAILURE: 0%
  • Boundary Products Web Design: GOOD 96%