Sunday, September 8, 2019

user behavior - Why do some webmasters INSIST on having auto-playing music elements on their webpages?




Is there any positive reason why someone might implement an auto-playing audio feature onto a webpage? I seem to see it all the time, especially on band pages and so on. The frustrating thing is trying to find the little 'flash player' box to mute or pause the track (if they've bothered to include that function) to stop it as soon as I can.


It's especially annoying when browsing in multiple tabs and you're unsure which page is playing it, or if it disrupts whatever you're do it - listening to music or at work etc.


Is there any scenario where auto-playing audio would be considered good UX and not downright annoying?



Answer



The only time it makes sense from a UX point of view is when the action is specifically to play media.


I'll use YouTube as an example: if you see a video in a list and click on it, it takes you to the player page where it starts playing automatically. This actually makes sense from a UX point of view, as the action desired is to play the media. Without auto-playing, after you've just clicked the video, you have to click play. The source of the audio is also quite obvious, as the media player control is front and center.


That said, a site like YouTube can easily get away with this since it's well known that YouTube plays videos. If the entry point to the page doesn't make it obvious you're going to play media, you shouldn't auto-play.


Likewise, when viewing the page, the audio source should be immediately obvious: for example, having a tiny low-contrast speaker icon in the corner of the page doesn't cut it.


No comments:

Post a Comment

technique - How credible is wikipedia?

I understand that this question relates more to wikipedia than it does writing but... If I was going to use wikipedia for a source for a res...