advertisement
advertisement

This is page 2 of:

Amazon Gets Tablet-Friendly, Finally Leaves 1995 Behind

September 7th, 2011

Compare that with the traditional left-rail department list. Forget fat fingers—it’s often hard to hit the right selection the first time with a mouse, especially on a laptop or netbook screen. That’s the result of a decade of trying to pile more and more onto the screen that customers see when they first arrive at a site. The result is an incomprehensible jungle of sales pitches—and too much noise for any of them to sell effectively, even on a big screen.

There are plenty of reasons E-Commerce sites are laid out that way, one of the biggest being inertia. But there really was a time when underpowered PCs had a hard time supporting exotic features such as drop-down Web site menus. Clicking through to a new page took time a customer might not be willing to invest. Cramming the homepage with every possible link made sense in 1995, when the design factor was a 1024-by-768 PC screen driven by a dial-up modem.

Replacing that design factor with a broadband-driven tablet screen makes a lot of sense, even for retailers who aren’t trying to support sales and direct delivery of music, movies and e-books. Instead of thinking of a tablet as a smartphone on steroids, the tablet becomes the more portable baseline for PCs. If an E-Commerce site plays nicely on a tablet, it probably works well on a PC, too.

And while Amazon looks like it has pushed hardest toward the tablet, some other major E-tailers have adopted at least part of that tack. Target’s recently revamped site has a similarly open, tablet-friendly feel—although the homepage is so long that any tablet user will spend a long time working her way through the endless list of departments to get to the bottom of the page. The Macy’s and Nordstrom online stores also have more than the average amount of space between selections, which makes them easier to navigate on a tablet.

On the other hand, even E-tailers who have cleared away the jungle to let some light and air into their homepages still typically have a briar patch at the bottom of the page. Almost everyone still crams in too many informational links in too-tiny type at the bottom of their homepages—links for careers, investor relations, team member services, terms and conditions, and typically dozens of others. In 1995, PCs didn’t have the horsepower to fold these into drop-down menus. Today, any tablet can do that easily.

Let’s see if Amazon can convince the rest of E-tail to clean up that mess.


advertisement

Comments are closed.

Newsletters

StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.