10 Bad UX Examples and Their Fixes

Doesn’t it confuse all of us when we don’t know whether to push or pull the door and we end up making the wrong move? Doesn’t it frustrate us when overly complicated vending machines take a long transaction time? Or when road signs are unclear, outdated, or poorly placed, which makes you take the wrong turn and cause navigation issues. These are all bad UX examples that we often face in our daily lives.

As Jared Spool says, “Good design, when done well, becomes invisible. It’s only when it’s done poorly that we notice it.

Bad UX examples stand out in the crowd, like a wolf in the flock of sheep. Some designs are good for nothing, and it makes you want to ask yourself, “What was even going on in the designer’s head?”

If the user finds it difficult to understand the interfaces and navigation or gets lost in the user flow, this means that your design is no less than a red flag, and it needs to be fixed.

You’ll be surprised to see that UX design fails are all around us. In this blog, we are about to shed some light on some of the common ones and how they can be fixed.

Let’s start.

Top Bad UX Design Examples with Their Possible Solutions

From common slip-ups to blunders any designer could make, you will be shocked to see how many tech giants end up creating failed designs by doing minor UX and UI blunders.

So keep your popcorn on standby, and let’s jump right into it.

WhatsApp’s Delete Message Feature

WhatsApp quickly became the leading app due to its flawless UX, simple interface, and fast usability. The application comes up with consistent updates to keep making the user experience better than ever.

One recent update that we are all aware of is the “Delete for everyone” feature. This lets you delete a text that you accidentally sent to someone it was not meant for, or you change your mind to un-send the message after sending it.

As a result, WhatsApp lets you delete the text for everyone so that you can pretend it never happened. But that’s not how it is. Notifying the receiver that the sender has erased a message undermines the initial intent of deleting the text, which comes under UX fails.

Moreover, the “Delete for everyone” shown in the chat instead of the message somehow stirs the pots. An awkward situation is built as the receiver starts thinking and questioning, “What was in the text? Why did you delete the text?”Top of Form

How can this be fixed?

An excellent approach to fix user experience problems like these would be to permanently delete the message without showing any description that the message was deleted. However, now, the concern of transparency on the platform would arise, which is why WhatsApp erases the messages instead of permanently deleting them. However, this can still be clearly communicated so that it can be better aligned with the user’s understanding. For instance, the app can write “obscure this message.”

Another constructive approach is to follow what Gmail is doing. They give the user 10 seconds after sending the message to delete the message without letting the receiver know.  

The main idea is to ensure that the function of the feature aligns with users’ expectations set by the messaging platform.

Password Kerfuffle

The hassle of making strong and complex passwords due to the requirement of various sites is real, as we already have several passwords to remember. Creating complex passwords makes them hard to remember, which results in constantly resetting them and wasting so much time.

The extensive requirement of creating strong million-letter-long passwords is not only time-consuming but also unnecessary. Users usually write their passwords somewhere or save them in notes, which is unsafe. Instead, it is better to make an easy-to-use password that is personal to every user.

How can this be fixed?

A good approach to fix UX failures like these would be to ask for a list of different things from users instead of just requesting them to enter one complicated password. Many bank applications and sites do this.

Moreover, you can ask the users for a location or a picture to make the task complex instead of playing around with numbers and letters to make passwords complex.

Facilitate user logins by offering the option to use their social media accounts. Alternatively, streamline the process of creating a new password, incorporating an additional security question to enhance safety.

Apple’s Storage Management System

The industry leader of design icons, Apple, has also made some blunders, which have resulted in bad UX examples. A prominent one is Apple’s storage management system. Imagine your child just took your first steps, or you ran into your all-time favorite artist.

You take out your phone to capture the moment, but you get an instant message that taking the photo is impossible because you do not have enough storage. There is no worse mood-killer than this.

This bad user experience is what you get from Apple’s storage management system. The company has made a major UX failure as their pop-up message doesn’t give the user a clear step on what to do next. They don’t show the options available to avert this issue. This reduces the chances of the user going to the settings and making the relevant changes as they don’t know what to do.

How can this be fixed?

This bad UX example can be fixed by showing the user how many photos are supposed to be deleted to make room for new memories to be stored. The user should also be shown how much storage requires cleaning.

A solution to this would be to integrate the dialog box with the storage management settings. This would enable the users to easily clear storage.

Additionally, the message box now shows the remaining storage on the device and prompts users to perform necessary cleaning. This enhancement significantly improves user experience and makes it easier for users to understand and take required actions.

Fiverr’s 5-Star Display

Fiverr has added to the list of bad UX examples by displaying the classic “5-star rating” with just “1 star.” This would not even fulfill the purpose as users will assume that the product or service only got a one-star rating, which will put the seller’s performance in question.

Moreover, at a glance, every user expects the standard 5 number of stars for a full rating. This is anti-intuitive to users and might not even register as a rating.

The designer might want to save space, but what’s the use of it when you end up killing the entire purpose of the feature? Moreover, the designer might have thought, “Let me create something different and better that would stand out in the market.” However, sometimes it’s better to stick to design heuristics and just do what people are already used to.

How can this be fixed?

Bad app designs like this force the users to do the extra work by thinking about their personal, unique way of doing things. And that’s a major red flag. The only way to fix this is by replacing the one star with the standard “5 stars” so that the purpose can be achieved.

Ryanair’s Booking Platform

If you’re a frequent traveler with Ryanair, you might have encountered frustrations with its booking platform. Booking a weekend getaway shouldn’t be this problematic. Unfortunately, Ryanair’s booking interface falls under bad UX examples. Their UI and UX design are falling flat as they have tactics that confuse and complicate the process.

This results in unexpected expenses due to hidden add-ons. For instance, essential options like declining insurance are buried within unrelated menus, making them challenging to locate.

Ryanair’s booking platform exemplifies the worst user interface examples because it deliberately misleads users into selecting options that benefit the company financially rather than prioritizing user satisfaction. This makes the user feel cheated, which makes them hate your brand.

How can this be fixed?

Ryanair’s bad app designs can be fixed through transparency. It is important to be true and loyal to your customers if you want a long-term relationship with them. Make the booking platform simple and easy to navigate. Everything should be on the front and visible to the users.

Avoid overcomplicating things, as this would not only detract the user from the overall user experience but also break the user’s trust in the brand.

O2’s Live Chat System

o2 also comes under the radar of bad UX examples as it encourages users to utilize the live chat feature for instant communication with customer representatives.

However, the company doesn’t always have enough representatives available to respond promptly to every user. As a result, users may end up waiting in a queue rather than being able to chat as advertised instantly.

How can this be fixed?

The company should understand that they are doing major UX design fails by pushing customers to do something that they cannot offer.

o2 does not consider that advertisements require a significant workforce to make the system effective. Until chatbots can effectively handle upset clients, a company should focus on hiring staff for the tasks they can handle.

A better idea would be to direct the users to email so that they do not have to wait for assistance. This would set the right expectations for clients.

Long Dropdowns

Long dropdowns are one of the bad UX examples that we think everyone has come across. Selecting your nationality from an endless dropdown menu without a search option can be frustrating. This inconvenience is increased for individuals from countries like the UK, which may be listed under various names such as Great Britain, United Kingdom, or Britain. Searching through a long list of countries to find yours can be tiresome.

How can this be fixed?

Dropdown menus without filters or subheadings can be time-consuming for users, particularly when they’re uncertain about what they’re seeking. The absence of a text entry field with autocomplete and filter features aggravates the issue by failing to assist users in quickly narrowing down their options.

The best way to correct this UX fail is by avoiding dropdown menus with more than ten options altogether instead of going for an extensive list.  

Netflix Hover Auto Play

Despite its immense popularity, Netflix has also ended up creating bad UX examples through some of its features. One of them is the hover Autoplay.

Users have been bothered by the Netflix Autoplay feature since its launch in 2015. Simply hovering over a film or TV thumbnail often triggers the Autoplay of a montage or looped trailer.

Consequently, if you wish to view information or details about the selected show, you’re unable to do so without a loud trailer playing in the background.

How can this be fixed?

Going for auto means the designers have made huge assumptions about the user’s desires. Netflix’s hover auto-play is a feature that is launched purely to skyrocket engagement. The company might have done A/B testing and gotten data that showed increased engagement, but they are looking at the wrong metrics.

Even Facebook and Instagram keep their audio on mute by default as they know not only that they are disturbing when auto-played but also that they destroy the focus of the user.

The best way to fix this UX failure is to mute the audio of the videos and leave it to the user whether they want to open it or not. Companies should understand that features that annoy users are no less than usability failures. They should be removed, without a doubt, if they are hindering the user from crucial information.

CNN’s Load Time 

CNN is one of the leading news organizations in the world. Its website is home to a wide variety of content including articles, blogs, images, and videos. However, the biggest drawback of CNN’s site is that its downloading time is frustratingly slow. The ‘PageSpeed Insights’ recognizes it as one of the slowest-loading websites.  

Mobile users abandon a site if it takes more than 3 seconds to load. As a result, there is a high chance that CNN will lose millions of users over time as users will bounce off to competitor news site which has fast and efficient loading times. 

How can this be fixed?

The massive content present on CNN’s site makes it slow as it weighs down the site’s performance. The best way to avert this problem is by:

• Compressing images and videos to reduce weight 
• Optimizing content to load quickly
• Removing unnecessary content 
• Reducing unused JavaScript code
• Using image formats like WebP and AVIF instead of PNG or JPEG as it is compression friendly 

Lipton’s Low-Quality Images

Lipton’s website ends up as one of the bad UX examples as they have used low-resolution and poor quality which makes them fuzzy. The text on the image is unclear and the user has to put a lot of effort into reading it. Moreover, most of them are stock images and not even optimized and uploaded in the right format which increases the loading time.

How to fix this?

Images are an essential part of the website as they are the face of it. The visuals breathe life into the website and declutter the content to increase readability and engagement. therefore, it’s essential to use good-quality images that are stock-free and corporate. This will not only light up the site but will also add an extra layer of authenticity to your brand. 

Let Denovers Fix your UX Issues

Is your product also getting criticism like these bad UX examples? Denovers is here to save your back. We are a skilled team of expert designers who are well-versed in UX laws, heuristics, and the tricks necessary to build flawless products that give users an exceptional experience.

You can count on us to not only make your products from scratch just according to your needs and requirements but also spot any UX design fails or usability issues in your existing products and resolve them.

That’s all

Making mistakes is not a bad thing. We all do that. However, the main question is to learn from your mistakes and never repeat them. As a skilled UX designer, you should keep all the bad UX examples in mind to ensure you stay away from making blunders like these. The best approach is to focus on the small details instead of the big ones, which do not even matter to the end user. This way, you will not only build user-friendly interfaces but also add value to the lives of your users.

FAQs