Posted by Christie Malry on November 24, 2012 at 10:38 am
Posted by Christie Malry on July 3, 2012 at 11:44 pm
The Financial Reporting Council has a new website. But of course, you already knew that, because they've spent the last few weeks telling everybody who cares to know (and quite a lot who don't) about it.
Now, obviously, I have a website. Actually, I have more than one. I know how exciting it is when you upgrade it, and how you just want to tell the whole world about how great it all looks and how they must be really excited too. Well, my friends, if you're ever in that position, resist the temptation.
Because this might happen:
IMPORTANT UPDATE ON RESUBSCRIBING TO FRC ALERTS
We are currently experiencing some technical difficulties with the subscription function on the new FRC website.
Due to technical fault, some users may be seeing a 'Page not found' message when clicking on the grey 'Subscribe' button at the foot of the homepage.
We are working on correcting this error which we hope will be fixed by the end of the day.
Due to the nature of the problem, some users will still be able to subscribe and are free to do so today. However, we advise all those unable to subscribe to attempt again tomorrow.
If you have any further queries or comments please call the press office on 020 7492 2395, or email email@example.com.
Really, guys, it would have been better if you could have transferred everyone on your old mailing list onto the new mailing list yourselves, without getting us to do it. Many simply won't bother. And they're really not going to bother if the feature isn't working properly.
Posted by Christie Malry on January 12, 2012 at 9:33 am
I know it's common at this point of the year to write "2011" when you mean "2012".
Posted by Christie Malry on February 8, 2011 at 9:07 am
A few days back, ICAEW mentioned on Twitter that they had gotten a new website. By and large it looks quite a lot like I remember the last one looking. The main differences are that:
- finally, only about ten years after they should have done, they've fixed their URL problem. Seasoned chartered accountants will remember that ICAEW URLs used to be about three times longer than any other company's URLs. Well, now they're at least legible, if a bit long.
- they seem to have introduced some social media concepts - you can now rate pages or tweet about individual pages right from within the website.
Unfortunately, there still seem to be some teething problems. Pages that have been advertised as recently as February's Accountancy magazine no longer work - for example www.icaew.com/narrowingthegap, at least at the time of writing. This can happen from Google searches too. So a search for VAT might yield this page, which (again, at the time of writing) leads to the dreaded 404 page.
There's also something very odd happening on their press releases page. The newsroom has stories for 2010, 2009 and 2008 but nothing for 2011. In fact, it has no 'Latest news' at all. There's nothing that is 'most viewed' and nothing under the 'Editor's choice'. The 'Opinion' articles all give you the dreaded 404 page. It tells you to "check back soon" without giving you any confidence that there's any point. At least they have some BBC news in the sidebar ("Ex tells of Raoul Moat gun terror"). But the rest of it's an absolute shambles.
There are some files you can find via Google search that look like they're not supposed to be there. Then there's a recurrence of their pubic rash problem (e.g. here) we reported earlier before. Add to that some curious results from the "Most viewed" pages (e.g. one page which tells you that the most viewed page is "Pakistan", "Pakistan", "Pakistan", "Pakistan"... all of which link to exactly the same page) and you're left wondering whether the ICAEW checked whether the website cake was fully cooked before taking it out of the oven. At the moment it's most certainly half-baked.
What are your favourite ICAEW website howlers? Add them in the comments.
Posted by Christie Malry on May 18, 2010 at 10:42 am
However, there is one amusing feature. On most pages there is a function that allows you to rate each page. As of the time of writing, this function is broken, meaning that every page has a ranking of 0.5 stars out of 5.0... i.e. fantastically unpopular. Even pages that have only one user ranking have an average of 0.5, so it must be a bug. It's a pretty funny and unfortunate error on what's otherwise quite a neat site.