Some of his stuff is correct, but he misses bigger points so often that what he's correct about loses its meaning because it's so clear he just doesn't get certain things.

Fredrik is right. When he talks about links that don't say where they go, he doesn't realize that a lot of us who read weblogs aren't online to buy something or execute some transaction. We're there to explore. And links that don't say where they go are... interesting! Sometimes a little mystery is good.

That all said, one thing I am certain of is that photoblogs are an entirely different animal than a standard blog. For instance, I've found the standard blogger.com and movable type templates--designed for text blogs--make for a singularly bad user experience when in a photoblog setting. I'll leave it at that.

I've been one of the harshest critics of users, thinking 'those stupid users -- can't they see how obvious it is?'. But at the same time I still see and hear people who don't click on an (obvious to me) link because, while it was blue, it wasn't underlined.

The point is -- for the majority of people using computers and the web -- none of these things we take for granted are obvious. And really, simplicity does not equal boring. Would you make the same generalization about photography? The truth is, to make something simple and interesting and usable is difficult but that's no reason to throw off what are mostly a fairly good set of guidelines. And that's what they are -- guidelines -- not rules and not the ten commandments.

His basic thesis is that you should not assume that the people reading your web page is as web-savvy as you are. In many cases he's right. Particularly in the case of web sites that are designed specifically to provide information. (Corporate sites, govenment sites, academic sites, etc.) Usability glitches should not interfere with a person's ability to find the information they need.

But blogs, photoblogs, and other personal web sites are not just in the business of providing information. There's an aspect of personality, playfullness, etc. to them that allows for a bit more flexibility.

Personally, I thought it was useful to read his weblog usability problems piece. I agree with most of it, even though I break some of the rules myself. (For example, I have a typepad address, but that's primarily because I've been too lazy to learn how to set up Wordpad or a similar self-hosted system).

I also agree that a standard typepad template makes for a lame experience with photoblogs, but that's what I use anyway, primarily because I started my photoblog as a short-term project and didn't expect it to run for so long (almost two years now). Also, I only post one image a week. But still, I'd like to have it so you can just click on the image and jump to the previous one. Maybe someday...

The problem with neilsen is that he's a media whore, he knows that he'll get his name out there by making statements that are designed to annoy designers and make headlines, such as "flash 99% bad". He knows that by doing this he's the first name the media will turn to when they're doing a story about usability and he'll take the fee and plug his book.

There are so many other usability 'gurus' out there who produce great concepts and ideas which have a practical application to developers and genuinely assist users, without deliberately trying to generate 'shock and awe' so they get their names in the media, and the blogsphere these days. I'm talking about people like Jeffery Veen and Steve Krug.

Every time people talk about neilsen he's laughing all the way to the bank, just ignore him. All the worthwhile advice he gives can be found on any basic summation of usability.

Of course, being a wiki, you can tear this apprt, re-write it, add or remove anything you see fit. It would be a great opportunity for those here who know something about web design to help photobloggers with less knowledge and experience.

Regards - Martin