Splash Pages Never Die!
April 08, 2004 | 
30 Comments
It’s the year 2004 and Web site splash pages are alive and well. They still suck. I imagine most people still hate them. Yet they’re still here, haunting Web sites all over the Web.
Why? I’ll leave you with the following from an undated (damn I hate that) article at About.com which was the #2 result from a Google search on “splash pages.”
Pros to Splash Pages
- Splash pages are fast loading, they get all the information up quickly on the first page without scrolling.
- Splash pages ensure that your readers see your animation or flash, at least once.
- They are a great way to show off your best work, like a portfolio.
- Splash pages allow your readers to choose the site technology that fits them.
- You can then use your server logs to see what the breakdown is of your actual customers.
If that doesn’t make you laugh, I’m not sure what would.
Filed under: Web Design
Comments
1. Andrew said:
Although to be fair to the About.com author, the “Cons to Splash pages” and her summary come out clearly against them. In fact, an argument against splash pages is probably most effective by acknowledging that there are reasonable-sounding reasons for using them. In other words, the “pros” are things that clients might say to you.
Posted on April 8, 2004 11:23 AM | #
2. J.D. said:
Die splash pages die! Only thing worse are popup ads, but those you can block. I don’t understand why people want to delay their visitors getting to the content they seek. NASA’s new site is a prime example. They hit you will a splash about the latest and greatest before you can get to the site. Then the front page also has this info, plus all the info you actually want. Why make users jump through hoops?
Posted on April 8, 2004 11:26 AM | #
3. Milan Negovan said:
LOL! This one is great! Should we call them “satisfy-your-ego” pages intead then? I can picture a guy thinking about the audience, “You can run, but you can’t hide!”
I think the biggest perversion of splash pages (or splash ads) is weather.com. Anyone seen more obnoxious ads? This is a rhetorical question.
Posted on April 8, 2004 11:28 AM | #
4. Dave S. said:
In regards to comment #3 – So any animation = ego? I rather think not. Having Flash or an animation that I’d like my visitors to see is the same as having a graphical header or photo I’d like my visitors to see; it’s all content.
I’m resolutely against splash pages, but widely lumping all animation into a category of ‘Flashturbation’ or whatever you call it is silly. It’s all about delivery. Bad Flash: splash page, entire site. Good Flash: embedded movies that enhance content ( http://www.pga.com/pgachampionship/2003/ ), or honest animated shorts.
Posted on April 8, 2004 11:36 AM | #
5. Keith said:
I’m agreed with Dave on this one, not all animation is bad.
However I do think Milan has a point. It’s all about how you do it and obviously pga.com is a very good example. There are many, many more examples out there of how not to do Flash animation.
Many times splash pages (not animation in general) do equal ego. What’s worse is a client who requests a splash animation. What for? So your designer can show of his/her Flash skills?
Posted on April 8, 2004 11:46 AM | #
6. Britt said:
In my experience, splash pages tend to be driven by executives or someone else with decision-making power who is not necessarily part of the web team.
I tried to argue against a splash page for our current site (www.deainc.com) but lost out. It’s basically just an added click.
Posted on April 8, 2004 12:18 PM | #
7. JC said:
“Splash pages are fast loading, they get all the information up quickly on the first page without scrolling. “
That’s one vote for them, big time, in my book. I did a site for a United Way and we did a splash page on it to show off their new “what matters” theme… quick flash thing, 5 basic frames of images + text that got the message of what they do across better than the reams of text inside the main content of the site. Ordinarily I hate flash splash pages, but this was one instance where it worked to their advantage.
Posted on April 8, 2004 12:27 PM | #
8. Chris Vincent said:
I would agree with JC on that. However, this can be done just as well on the front page the way JD mentioned NASA does it (on the real front page, not the splash), can’t it?
The only thing a splash page can do that the front page can’t is allow the visitor to choose their browser for compatibility. But, on the flip side, who’s still targeting specific browsers in this day and age?
Posted on April 8, 2004 01:13 PM | #
9. Keith said:
I’ve got to disagree with you JC.
If you have a good homepage design you should have no reason at all for a splash page. That Pro you site could just as easily apply to the homepage.
I know there is an exception to every rule, but with this one I really can’t figure out what that is.
Posted on April 8, 2004 01:30 PM | #
10. Lea said:
“Flashturbation” ?? Dave, you crack me up! :D
Well, I used to have a splash page for my portfolio, and I still have one for my weblog’s root, (xox.lealea.net as opposed to where my weblog is at xox.lealea.net/01)
Why? Because frankly, I kept changing things in my site before I settled on something, so my splash is a way to direct people one way or another (my weblog used to be on lealea.net as opposed to xox.lealea.net). Though, it’s becoming quickly obsolete…
Also, again, I’m going to be devil’s advocate and say something splash pages are not too bad of an idea especially if the page is leading into a Flash site. Kind of a “Welcome – Just to let you know, you need Flash to see this site” instead of potentially surprising a newbie user with a site they can’t see off the top. Just more polite and pretty than those empty boxes with the icon and a pop-up box saying “Download this in order to see this site.”
Posted on April 8, 2004 03:42 PM | #
11. Justin said:
I think Dave S. has pointed out a superb example of how to use flash content to enhance a website. That PGA animation is more content than simply branding.
The only good reason I can come up with for a splash page, or animation, is to force a visitor to see an ad or message before allowing them to access what they actually came for. Since so many people blot out their negative experience of splash pages (due to their overwhelming irrelevance), they forget how useless the ones they’ve encountered are.
I’d be very fustrated if I visited the United Way and had to sit through a commercial before having access, as if I was visiting Salon.com. The PGA site illustrates how it can enhance without disrupting the overal visit. Ad’s are disruptive. A splash page to filter visitors to specific realms of a company is typically a designer avoiding good navigation (even when forced to). No offence anyone… I think we’ve all had to fight these ‘benefits’ and occassionally lost.
Posted on April 8, 2004 03:52 PM | #
12. Dave M said:
I also have to agree with JC’s comment #7 and like the idea of a (sp|f) lash page for a new slogan or campaign. With a charity site like United Way, I can see its effectiveness if done right. It’s a way to say “here’s a new thing we think is important” - but don’t always have a splash page if your site is traditional non-Flash. Leave the splash page up for only a couple weeks, then return to normal.
Maybe you could set a cookie denoting that the user has seen the new splash page once and can now go straight to the home page. Or let the user choose “skip intro: this time | always”. There would then be a section of your home page or site about the new campaign and a link to the flash for people who do want to see it again.
I guess what I’m getting at is there are ways to make good (small, short, effective) splash pages, ways to treat the user with respect (skip once/always), and give the user the choice to see the splash page (Flash/animation) later.
Posted on April 8, 2004 07:41 PM | #
13. DarkBlue said:
For the ignoramus (ie: me), can someone please explain the difference between a “splash” page and a “home” page.
Posted on April 9, 2004 01:15 AM | #
14. MaThIbUs said:
A splash page is a page such as on my site; you have to click it to enter the site.
Yes, my site still uses a splash page… I’ve been planning to remove that piece of crap since about yestermillenia!
Posted on April 9, 2004 04:46 AM | #
15. pete said:
I don’t mind splash pages. Depending on the site content it can set the mood, certainly for those arty type sites where graphics are the reason for the sites existence in the first place.
The only ones I dislike are when the designer(?!) has decided to make it an IQ test to enter the site by making the user mouse around the damn page looking for the link.
A splash page would make no sense at a news site like the BBC or CNN of course but then there’s always going to be one designer who doesn’t get the intended audience.
Without context you just end up sounding like those that spout “all javascript is evil”.
Posted on April 9, 2004 06:37 AM | #
16. JC said:
I agree, it *could* be done if the homepage was built for it. But they’re using a PHP Nuke news site type thing, and every time they try to use the “announcement” area, they break it, so I turned it off. It’s not a design that lends itself well to what they needed the splash page for… but it works wonderfully for their major need, which is lots of content, easily added, searchable, and archived by month. Though I’m looking at giving them something less complex than that, now… it’s turning out they aren’t using the extra features they thought they’d be using, so a basic blog software and a download manager would probably cover their needs as well, and be easier to work with from my side than Nuke.
But I’ll put it to you this way… it worked. Despite their site getting a ridiculously small amount of traffic, they had people asking about the new campaign based on it. And yes, it should come off shortly after going on.
Posted on April 9, 2004 06:52 AM | #
17. DarkBlue said:
I see. So this article does not condemn a home page? By home page, I mean a page that summarises the site content and links to the major areas.
Posted on April 9, 2004 07:10 AM | #
18. Niket said:
Are most splash pages pure evil? :-)
If the splash page contains “skip intro” link or if it contains just one or two links into the website… just trash the splash
However, it can be put to good use for branding. For example, lets say a hypothetical UN Something Program (UNSP) :-)
UNSP could check the cookies for first-time visitors and show them a splash page. This could contain animation on how “Something” has been affected by the UNSP program. On the same page, they could have links to most relevant portions of their website (“Home”, “Quick Facts”, “Donate”, “News”) and a search button.
Returning visitors would have seen the splash already, so there is no reason to serve them a splash page again.
I guess, the only point I want to make is “Nothing is pure evil”.
Posted on April 9, 2004 07:37 AM | #
19. Keith said:
I’m not sure who said “splash pages are pure evil” but of course nothing is “pure evil.”
Let me make this clear; I’m not talking about homepages at all. Of course the homepage is one of the most important parts of a site.
I’m talking about these pages that come before the homepage.
Now I can see, maybe, if I really stretch, that there may be some cases where they might be useful. I can’t think of one, and sorry all the examples and pros I’ve heard in this discussion don’t fly, with me anyway, because you can achieve the same goals by putting more time into a better homepage design.
A few of you mentioned branding. Come on, if you’re relying on a splash page for branding purposes you’ve got to rethink things. Your brand should be worked into your whole site and on the Web branding is more about the user experience than it is logos and colors anyway. Splash pages won’t do anything but hinder your visitors.
Visitors (both first time and returning) generally don’t like splash pages. That’s a bold statement that I can back up. I’ve actually user tested a sites with splash pages.
Not only that – I’ve yet to meet one person, who isn’t a designer or Web type, who likes splash pages. I’m sure there are some out there, but to the vast majority they are nuisances.
Unless someone can point out to me a case where a splash page actually ads value in a way that a good homepage design couldn’t – I’m going to stick to my guns here and say they’re useless.
Posted on April 9, 2004 09:05 AM | #
20. Veerle Pieters said:
I agree with Dave S. (#4), it’s all about delivery. I think embedded movies are OK as long as they enhance the content, and pga.com is indeed a prefect example of this.
As long as it doesn’t restrict the user’s freedom and it’s there with a functional purpose, or to bring out a message I have no problem with splashes. It can set a certain mood the site needs.
Posted on April 12, 2004 04:20 AM | #
21. John said:
A valid use for an “entrance” or splash page can be the important matter of language preference.
It is a critical option best decided prior to being flooded in content you dont understand and pecking around for your little national flag :)
Other than that, good design and sniffers handle most other critical matters.
Posted on April 13, 2004 09:40 AM | #
22. Jason Lotito said:
1. A warning page. Warning you about the type of content that will appear on the main website. This is not just something adult sites would use, but anyone displaying content that might not be work-safe, or that are not good for younger viewers. These type of splash pages are good.
2. Notices that must be read. If something happens to the company or website, and the returning, or new visitor must be made aware of it, a splash page with a clear “Yes, I understand” button is good. A homepage can’t satisfy this.
Posted on April 13, 2004 10:40 AM | #
23. Jennifer Grucza said:
Even better than using a splash page to select language would be to use the language specified by the user in their browser preferences (in Java, you would just call getLocale() on the request object to get this value). Then you could feed the user the properly translated page automatically.
Posted on April 13, 2004 11:24 AM | #
24. Andrew Dunning said:
I asked a person at the Government of Canada about why they always use splash pages for language selection; according to him, they didn’t want to do sniffing because their site is used from a large number of public access terminals, which aren’t necessarily used in the language they’re set to.
Posted on April 13, 2004 03:17 PM | #
25. Visceraman1 said:
Apparently they’re still hip.
Posted on April 13, 2004 11:44 PM | #
26. Sam Walker said:
Completely off-topic, but I just looked around about.com to see what it’s all about for the first time, and I find it interesting that they have a Cannabis Corner with all kinds of guides to rolling joints and such. In case you didn’t know, this site used to be advertised quite a bit (And still occasionally is) on Channel One, a youth-news show that tons of high-schools and middle schools show in the morning to students.
Posted on April 15, 2004 10:01 PM | #
27. John said:
Wow There’s some very interesting comments here… A lot of people hate splash pages then! I think they can be useful depending on what field you’re in, a lot of people are impressed with ours and that helps our business. I may have to reconsider this now!
Posted on April 29, 2004 03:49 AM | #
28. jacky said:
I’m agreed with Dave on this one, not all animation is bad.
However I do think Milan has a point. It’s all about how you do it and obviously pga.com is a very good example. There are many, many more examples out there of how not to do Flash animation.
Posted on May 7, 2004 06:56 AM | #
29. Barry said:
I once thought splash pages were way cool, but over the years I’ve changed my mind. The splash page can be a great piece of art, display talent and set the mood for the experience ahead…but it gets in the way of accessing the content.
Posted on June 8, 2004 11:05 AM | #
30. Dave Shields said:
Everyone has missed the biggest reason to avoid splash pages. They really destroy your traffic.
The government of Canada doesn’t need to advertise, but most of us create sites to be seen and visited for important reasons, and if the site is in a competitive keyword phrase, a splash page will likely push them back to page 10.
I would take a lot of SEO extra effort to overcome the handicap of a spash page. (:-)
Posted on October 18, 2005 12:57 PM | #
Comments are now closed