Hamburger menu's (aka three-lined button) hurt your site

[FirstPageResults]

What's a hamburger menu you ask? This:

Interaction theory, A/B tests, and the evolution of some of the top apps in the world all support the same thesis: The hamburger button is bad for engagement, and you should probably replace it with a tab bar or other navigation scheme.

...

Essentially, what’s out of sight is out of mind. Any navigation options you hide behind the hamburger will be forgotten, or at least used a lot less. It doesn’t help that the button is often placed in the top left corner — the hardest place to reach when using the phone with just your right hand.

The article is referring to apps, but this is also relevant for websites:

http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/24/before-the-hamburger-button-kills-you/


A colleague also shared these stats from a Time magazine trial a short while back:

And here are some more pretty pictures that illustrate the extra effort to reach the standard hamburger menu:

(Source)


Personally I have no issue with the burger menu. Never really given it much thought tbh, but the UX and frontend developers I work with love harping on about how crappy it is..Your thoughts?

 

[findtim]

great info, thanks

i don't like them but i don't think they are going away and i think they will grow in popularity as more people understand them.

tim

 

[eBranding.com.au]

I don't like them either and I don't use them on my sites.

 

[nt81]

At least it is some form of a standard looking thing.

Also, I only ever really see them on mobile phone browsers where there is very little real estate.

Tablets seem to be big enough pixel-wise to show the smaller side of a mobile responsive site anyway without needing the burger.

Interesting stats, but I doubt that they did much of a study to get the numbers. And then, did they even compare that with responsive vs non-responsive sites ignoring the burger. Probably not.

 

[FirstPageResults]

Just realised those stats aren't from Time, they are from here:
http://exisweb.net/mobile-menu-abtest

Time has been testing their menu in similair fashion though. My bad.

Yes it is becoming standardised. And yes, they may become as widely recognised as the shopping cart icon - but in the mean time that's potentially a lot of lost revenue opportunities. People don't want to upset the applecart. Facebook being the obvious exception (they have pretty much removed it all together incase you didn't know).

There are also wider issues at play here, such as the misconception that icons make for better user experience. They gnerally do not (with some obvious exceptions).

And hamburger menu's are becoming more prevelant on desktop sitesHere is just one (poor) example:
http://www.business.vic.gov.au/

 

[nt81]

While it is great to say that people using them are losing revenue, there still isn't any answer on

Non Responsive Site
vs
Responsive Site with Hamburger Menu

In that case, I am 99% sure that the Responsive site would get more revenue. Because, at least the site is responsive.

Facebook would be more heavily used on their mobile app, not a mobile browser which is natively touch and allows more functions (left swipe in, right swipe in etc) - so that isn't comparing Apples to Apples.

It is a great point to make, and I certainly don't mean to de-value your opinion, however at the end of the day

Responsive > Non-Responsive. Hamburger or not.

 

[FirstPageResults]

I don't disagree with you on that at all. FWIW I'm privvy to stats from sites where those tests are actually run, and ROI in dollar can be seen.

 

[nt81]

Pizza Ordering = Fat Fingers?

 

[xwdomains]

Just realised those stats aren't from Time, they are from here:
http://exisweb.net/mobile-menu-abtest

Time has been testing their menu in similair fashion though. My bad.

Yes it is becoming standardised. And yes, they may become as widely recognised as the shopping cart icon - but in the mean time that's potentially a lot of lost revenue opportunities. People don't want to upset the applecart. Facebook being the obvious exception (they have pretty much removed it all together incase you didn't know).

There are also wider issues at play here, such as the misconception that icons make for better user experience. They gnerally do not (with some obvious exceptions).

And hamburger menu's are becoming more prevelant on desktop sitesHere is just one (poor) example:
http://www.business.vic.gov.au/

wow that site hurts my eyes and looks terrible lol

 

[findtim]

And hamburger menu's are becoming more prevelant on desktop sitesHere is just one (poor) example:
http://www.business.vic.gov.au/

HA HA, that is such a good example, why? because it shows a complete and utter waste of government money

what a S&^T website !
http://www.business.vic.gov.au/mark...ebsite/choose-the-right-hardware-and-software

BUT WAIT, don't click the above link, get to it yourself from the homepage, better still get someone else who is a small business owner do it whilst you watch.

on a differnt page i LOVE this quote

3. Research website building platforms

Ask around and check online forums such as Whirlpool.

Whirlpool !, thats like throwing a 1 year old into the deep end

tim

 

[CyberClick]

I don't use hamburger menus as most ppl wouldn't know what it is. From a usability perspective it's right up there with the animations that slide content in as you scroll the page.

 

[nt81]

http://exisweb.net/menu-eats-hamburger

Some statistical info to back things up.

I still don't understand how people have no idea what it is...

 

[Cooper Mills DomainLawyer]

has anyone done their own test on the hamburger / menu button ?

It would be interesting to see what other people's results are like

 

[findtim]

i'm starting to grow to like them ( hamburgers) i still prefer "menu" and it takes up the same space.

i don't have stats but my clients seem to be having no issues with the hamburger ,

tim