9
25 Comments

Please review my cookieless live chat landing page

https://blether.chat/
submitted this linkon June 30, 2022
  1. 2

    I can count at least 3 different fonts being used, I think it would be better if it was more consistent across the page. also, your widget at the bottom right blends in with the background. Finally, this is kind of unrelated, but your site doesn't have a favicon.

  2. 1

    Tbh, I just wanted to sign up but the chat box is so ugly, I really don't want to integrate it in that form on my website.. Sorry to be that blunt but just compare it with the other chat tools out there, it's soooo ugly.

    1. 1

      Just curious what part of it is ugly? The actually form? That will be getting improved soon, I've just been busy with other stuff.

      1. 1

        Yes, the chat box that pops up. Okay, am curious how it will look :)

        1. 1

          Sorry, I'm still confused as to what part. Is tit the entire pop up or just the form part.

          https://i.imgur.com/3Qv5ZXZ.png So just theform part

          or the pop up as a whole like here https://i.imgur.com/rXUv0QQ.png

          1. 1

            Yes, the whole thing. Also that it just pops up without an animation.

            Compare to the box from Tidio for example: https://imgur.com/a/bDMu922

            edit: Eh yes sorry I meant the form, but also the frame, missing animations, it just looks super unpolished to me.

            I mean, you want that people put it on their professional websites, so it should be as attractive as possible! :)

            1. 1

              Overall, it seems pretty similar to the Tidio. The animation stuff is minor IMO and there are things that provide better value, such as improving the information provided for chat requests. Adding screenshot support. Improving the website analytics. These all provide a large amount of value to the customer and therefore me whereas animations provide a low amount of value.

              If you want something that is polished then there are plenty of competitors that will happily take your money. I'm not meaning to be rude, but I know my position. It's not polished, it's not even beta launched. What you get now is going to be different from what it will be like in a few months. And the price is going to be higher in a few months. Even then on the free plan, there is no one that offers what I do. If you want polished, you need to pay for polished. If you want a bargain you subscribe at the start and lock in the grandfathered pricing and wait until it gets polished.

              1. 1

                I think you're missing the point he tried to make.

                You can have all the features in the world but if you're product looks terrible ain't nobody going to use it.

                At the present moment you really need to rethink your UX.

                Think of it from the perspective of a hypothetical customer.

                They come to your site to see if your chat bot is worth using.

                It takes around 7 seconds on average to leave a first impression.

                They open your chat demo:

                • no animation
                • bad ui

                And that's it. Their opinion has already formed on your product. You can have all the features in the world, but at that point it's already too late. The customer is gone.

                1. 1

                  I didn't miss their point.

                  Their point was they wanted something polished. I explained, that my not-even-beta-launched product isn't polished. It won't be polished for some time. Hence why it's cheaper than all competitors while not trying to compete on price, it's just that is a fair price for what is currently there. The price will go up. Sometimes, you've got to be realistic. If someone says "I want X" when X isn't achievable right now then it's better to admit it than to attempt something not achievable. It's not achievable. There are competitors that can deliver that right now and they'll be happy to take your money. I'm a big believer in telling people to use competitors if that is what is better for them.

                  Is it valid feedback? To an extent. I looked at this guy's site and it's not a good design. It's on par with mines. It's unpolished too. So, as you can see, this guy's caring about design only goes so far. They say they care about one thing but when you dig depper they don't really care.

                  He also provided an example of another chat system and used that as a good design. It's very similar, which doesn't make sense. How can this be what he wants when it's rather similar in design. So you have to then think, that what he was wanting was the missing features, the knowledge base, etc.

                  And that's it. Their opinion has already formed on your product. You can have all the features in the world, but at that point, it's already too late. The customer is gone.

                  Honestly, then it's not much of a loss. If their objection was I don't like the design. Then they'll always go with one they do like the design. But the design isn't the unique selling point. The design often is very low on the list of reasons people choose products.

                  Who would be interested in this product?

                  • Companies/people who want/need to comply with GDPR while providing a live chat.
                  • Companies/people who want/need free live chat that supports slack.
    2. 1

      Also a question: If I integrate the tool, how can I set my online times, or does it determine it depending on whether I am logged into Slack?

      1. 1

        It figures out the online status based on your slack status.

  3. 1

    It's really good design , some people here ( often including me ) forgot that design is for customers not for designers 😂 , being too much professional might "scare" costumers although chat button I would make in different colour 🙂

  4. 1

    Are you sure you don't need a consent banner for this? The problem is NOT cookies when embedding a chat application, but sending data to a third-party website (by including scripts from their domain).

    1. 1

      The cookie banner is about storing data on the users computer. These include your own first party cookies and localStorage that are not for something that is strictly required for the function to work. The most common way to store data on someone else's computer is using cookies. This is why it's nicknamed the cookie banner.

      You are allowed to process data and have third parties process data for you without consent if you have a legit purpose/need that does not override the rights of the person.

      To put it simply. The reason for those consent banners IS TO CONSENT TO THEM STORING DATA ON YOUR COMPUTER. Furthermore, consent much be received before you're allowed to have data stored on their cookies. You must also be able to reject the cookies in an easy manner. Failure to do these will result in your consent banner being nothing but a nuisance to people. To be on the safe side, don't use cookies/localStorage other than when you have a legit technical need and legit purpose.

      1. 1

        You are allowed to process data and have third parties process data for you without consent if you have a legit purpose/need that does not override the rights of the person.

        As far as I know, this is not true. For example, just embedding a font resource from Google fonts is illegal: https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/31/website_fine_google_fonts_gdpr/

        The problem with embedding 3rd party resource is that visitor data is sent to this third party (user IP, user agent, time of visit and more) and can be used to track the user across the web.

        1. 1

          As I said in my original response, which you quoted, you're allowed to use a third party to process data when there is a legitimate need. The courts found that there was no legitimate need because you can self-host google fonts.

          Translated from the original resource

          1. There is also no justification for the encroachment on the general right of personality. A legitimate interest of the defendant within the meaning of Art. 6 Para. 1 f) DS-GVO, as claimed by it, does not exist, because Google Fonts can also be used by the defendant without a connection to a Google Server is established and the IP address of the website user is transmitted to Google.

          I'm sure you'll then go on about Google Analytics being illegal which you can't self-host. Google Analytics is illegal to use even with user consent. Because Google's attempt at ringfencing off the EU data to EU servers was considered invalid. The courts decided that US courts could force Google a US company to hand over the data and Google would be forced to comply. US data laws are incompatible with the EU GDPR laws therefore you can't host your data there or give it to a company that is bound by US laws (it seems).

  5. 1

    can anyone leave an upvote so I can create a post?

    I'll be grateful

    Thanks,

    Eric

  6. 1

    TBH the designers I know would cry about the choice of a font. And I also don't think it looks very professional. The product idea is interesting though.

  7. 1

    Very playful design, however to be honest the colors hurt my eyes a bit. It's quite hard to read the yellow text on the light-blue background.

    I also agree with @shubhamdhawan regarding the font consistency, there are too many "wild" fonts. Maybe try to get a better pairing.

    Good luck!

  8. 1

    Interesting design. A few things you might want to consider:

    • The dark drop shadow around these big yellow blocks feels very distracting
    • In the top navigation, the LOGIN button is not clear - this yellow color is not clearly visible in such a thin font style in the button
    • Right now, all three nav buttons look standalone entities and not coherent - it's due to the use of 3 different styles in the same navigation menu - you might want to reconsider
    • Font consistency: There are multiple fonts and font styles being used on the page currently. If you're going for the playful font as titles and a standard font (as you've used already) for body text, stick to it. As of now, in the first fold alone - you have 3 different font styles - the playful font, the italic font, and regular text.
    • The other buttons that say: TRY FOR FREE are easy to miss while scrolling the page - you can experiment playing around with their size and font-weight.
    • On the pricing page, there are a few contrast issues making it difficult to read the information
    • Also, as a user, it took me some time to figure out the exact price - which is why you might want to focus on the $ amount a little - maybe by increasing the size, increasing the font weight and making it bold, or adding it to an altogether new section

    All in all, I think it's a good start and you can iterate further upon it.

  9. 1

    looks good. You will integrate Whatsapp or similar.

  10. 1

    The landingpage is very clear. I think the blue and yellow color combination is daring.

    • consider removing the box shadow from the yellow blocks.
    • Maybe give the chat widget button a different color since it can be hard to distinguish from the blue background.
    • For the widget itself, maybe take look at tawk.to and intercom and imitate their widget design while keeping your unique color and font.
  11. 0

    The Alaskas World website includes details about your upcoming flights and other services. In addition, you’ll find details on your benefits and the software you need to keep track of your work schedules on this page.

    https://alaskasworld.pics/

  12. -1

    This comment has been voted down. Click to show.