The Weebly app, based on the review data, demonstrates serious shortcomings in usability, design, functionality, and customer support. Testers found it challenging to navigate, lacking in customization options, and deficient in essential features. Pricing is perceived as unfavorable, and performance is inconsistent.
FREE | PRO – $0-00/MONTH
A diverse group of testers were asked to build a website, from start to finish, to assess the strengths and weaknesses of Weebly from different perspectives:
Name, Email
* Signup is not available from Weebly iOS app.
Free Package
The Weebly app’s ease of use receives an exceptionally low rating, indicating a highly unsatisfactory experience for testers. The app lacks an intuitive interface, which makes it challenging to navigate and understand. Regrettably, editing a website is not a straightforward task when using the app.
For a mobile website building app to be considered easy to use, it should have an intuitive and user-friendly interface that is easy to navigate with touch controls. The app should provide clear and concise instructions on how to use its various features and tools, and it should allow users to easily preview their website and make changes on the go.
The app does not really offer much to work with. Its only consistency is in how awful it is all over.
The app’s ease of use is seriously lacking, with a very low rating. It’s challenging to navigate and comprehend, making the process of editing a website an uphill battle. The interface is far from intuitive.
The learning curve is steep, earning another low rating. This app is not user-friendly, especially for beginners, as it presents significant challenges in understanding and navigating its functionalities.
The workflow efficiency of the app is abysmal. Basic tasks require convoluted steps, and even simple edits mandate accessing the desktop site. This lack of fluidity seriously hampers the user experience.
A mobile website building app that is clear should be easy to navigate, with clear and concise labels for all buttons and menus. The app should provide intuitive and logical workflows, so that users can easily find the features they need and accomplish their goals without confusion or frustration.
This app is not clear in any way.
The app fails to provide clear instructions or guidance, leaving users to fend for themselves. The absence of support within the app and reliance on an external support site via a link is frustrating.
The visual hierarchy is confusing, earning a very low rating. The interface lacks organization and guidance, making it challenging to understand and navigate the app’s features effectively.
Consistency is lacking throughout the app. The design, behavior, and overall experience are consistently poor, creating a frustrating environment for users.
A mobile website building app that is lightweight should load quickly and operate smoothly, with minimal lag or delays.
This is pretty horrible. The app does not offer the ability to edit a website.
The design of the app is unsatisfactory. Its aesthetic appeal is minimal. Additionally, the app’s design flexibility is severely limited, hindering users’ ability to create unique and visually pleasing websites. The app’s designs fail to meet modern aesthetic standards, resulting in a lack of appeal to users seeking visually pleasing and contemporary designs.
The design flexibility of the app is extremely limited. Testers were unable to easily customize colors, fonts, and other design elements to align with their preferences and brand identity. One tester commented simply, “Zero.”
Business Ethics refers to the principles and considerations that guide the development and usage of the application, ensuring responsible and user-centric practices. It involves adopting ethical standards, maintaining user privacy and security, and prioritizing user experience.
NA
None.
The Weebly app’s design aspect is notably deficient across various dimensions. The absence of template variety, aesthetic appeal, and design flexibility hampers users’ ability to create visually appealing and unique websites tailored to their specific needs. These limitations detract from the ability to created anything of quality.
The overall ease of use of the app receives a very low rating, reflecting the difficulties users face while trying to use the app. The average score of 26% suggests that the app’s usability falls far short of expectations.
The average score of 22% reinforces the app’s lackluster performance in terms of features and functionality, leaving testers with a subpar experience.
Features refer to the tools, functionality, and capabilities that each app provides for users to build and customize a professional-looking website. Because our review is exclusively of the mobile app, and not of the browser-based builder, a key metric is how much of the website builder’s feature-set is available in the app.
Basically ZERO functionality
The app’s features are lacking. Testers found the provided features to be inadequate and insufficient for their needs, resulting in a subpar experience overall.
The app’s functionality is lacking. While it manages to provide some necessary tools for website creation, editing, and management, the overall functionality is limited, resulting in an unsatisfactory user experience, leading to a user experience that can be described as almost non-existent.
The app’s extensibility is limited, earning a the lowest rating possible. It does not offer support for additional features or plugins that could enhance and expand its capabilities.
Regrettably, there are no features within the app that facilitate collaborative efforts among team members or allow multiple users to work together effectively.
Customization refers to the level of options and flexibility that the app provides for designing a website.
Customizability is severely restricted,. The app fails to offer meaningful options for users to control the layout, design, and features of their websites.
The app’s ability to control the layout of pages is limited. Testers were not provided with satisfactory options to customize the arrangement of sections within their web pages.
Design control is also insufficient. Testers were not granted the capability to modify design elements like colors, fonts, and images to create a unique visual identity for their websites.
The app’s feature control is lacking. Testers did not have the necessary options to customize features such as navigation menus, forms, and galleries according to their requirements.
Integration options refer to the ability of the app to connect and integrate with external services, platforms, or tools to enhance the functionality and capabilities of the website being built.
The app’s integration capabilities are minimal. It does not adequately support integrations with popular third-party tools and services, such as social media platforms, e-commerce solutions, and analytics tools.
The app’s ability to ensure seamless connections with integrations is lacking. Integrations are not easy to set up and often result in conflicts or issues.
The app does not offer language options for its interface, meaning it is not available in multiple languages.
The average score of 22% underscores the app’s underperformance when it comes to providing meaningful features and functional capabilities to users. The app’s features and functionality fall well below user expectations, leading to a notably unsatisfactory user experience. The low average score further highlights the deficiencies in these crucial aspects of the app.
The app’s average score of 30% reflects its inadequate performance in SEO-related aspects. Although some areas like site optimization perform better, the app’s overall SEO capabilities do not meet expectations.
SEO (Search Engine Optimization) abilities refer to the app’s ability to help users optimize their website for search engines, such as Google and Bing. By including these SEO features, a mobile website building app can help users improve the visibility and ranking of their website in search engine results, potentially driving more traffic and engagement to their website.
The app’s SEO abilities are lacking.. It fails to provide sufficient tools and features for effective search engine optimization, resulting in suboptimal visibility and performance in search engine results.
The app does not adequately allow users to edit and customize metadata, such as page titles, descriptions, and keywords. This lack of control hinders users’ ability to optimize their content for search engines.
URL customization options are lacking within the app. Testers were not provided with the necessary tools to create human-readable and SEO-friendly URLs.
The app’s mobile optimization capabilities are inadequate. It fails to generate mobile-friendly sites that load quickly and correctly, negatively impacting user experience on mobile devices.
By prioritizing performance and speed, a mobile website should provide users with a fast and responsive experience, enabling them to quickly and efficiently browse websites from their mobile device. The second part of this section pertains to the performance and speed of the websites created by the app.
Website performance is barley acceptable.
NA
The app receives another low rating for site optimization.
The app’s average score of 30% emphasizes its subpar performance across various SEO-related categories. While there might be certain aspects that perform slightly better, the overall SEO experience remains below satisfactory levels.
The app’s average score of 34% mirrors its poor performance and reliability, encompassing various aspects related to user experience and technical stability.
A mobile website building app that is lightweight should load quickly and operate smoothly, with minimal lag or delays
While the app’s performance is acceptable to some extent, there is room for improvement to provide a smoother and more seamless user experience.
The app’s stability is lacking. It tends to experience crashes and lag, particularly when handling substantial amounts of content or complex layouts.
The app’s reactivity, or responsiveness, receives one of its only good ratings, indicating that it promptly responds to user actions and provides a relatively seamless and uninterrupted experience with minimal latency or delays.
A mobile website building app with a high chance of completion should provide users with the tools and features they need to easily create a website that meets their needs
Unable to publish from App
Testers encountered obstacles that hinder their ability to achieve their desired outcomes. Testers were unable to publish their websites directly from the app, contributing to its overall lack of completeness.
Our testers found that user guidance within the app is inadequate.. It fails to effectively guide users through the website creation process or offer helpful suggestions or best practices.
Quality assurance options are lacking within the app. Testers noted that users do not have the means to thoroughly preview and test their websites across different devices and browsers before publishing.
The app’s responsiveness receives a below average rating. It does not perform very well in terms of responsiveness and user experience.
The app does not prioritize mobile-friendly designs. It fails to ensure a good user experience on smaller screens.
The app does not offer adaptive layouts that automatically adjust to different screen sizes and orientations.
The app’s interface successfully emulates a mobile app’s ease of use on touch devices.
The average score of 34% reflects the poor performance and reliability of the app. Testers faced challenges related to performance and stability across various aspects, contributing to the overall lower average score. The app’s performance and reliability are areas of concern, as evidenced by the subpar ratings and the average score that highlights the deficiencies in these critical aspects of user experience.
The average score of 30% reflects the low performance of the app’s customer support and documentation. While certain aspects, such as documentation, fare better, the overall support experience remains subpar, as indicated by the average score.
The app’s customer support is rated as 30%. Testers found the available customer support options and effectiveness to be below satisfactory, suggesting that improvements are needed to enhance user assistance and issue resolution
The app offers support through a link to support site.
The app provides documentation, including tutorials, FAQs, and troubleshooting guides via a link to a their support site
The app lacks an active user community where users can share knowledge, advice, and feedback.
No specific information is provided regarding the app’s transparency on collecting personal data or options available to users regarding data privacy.
The average score of 30% reflects testers poor impressions of the app’s support and documentation. While certain aspects, such as documentation, may offer some value, the overall support experience remains inadequate, resulting in the lower average score. Users may face challenges in accessing effective assistance and comprehensive resources for using the app.
The app’s pricing and value for money receive a rating of 34%. Testers perceived the app’s pricing in relation to the value it provides as below satisfactory.
The app offers a variety of pricing options with different tiers, earning a low rating. However, tester found that adding even basic functionality to their websites can be prohibitively expensive.
Really expensive to add even basic functionality
The app’s cost-effectiveness is rated low as well, indicating the app does not offer competitive value for the features and functionality it provides.
The app’s transparency in communicating its pricing structure, limitations, upsells, and hidden fees is rated low. Testers felt that the app’s pricing information may not be clear and upfront, giving rise to negative perceptions.
The average score of 34% reflects testers poor impressions of the app’s pricing and value for money. While the app may offer multiple pricing tiers, the overall perception of cost-effectiveness and transparency remains below satisfactory levels.
The app’s average score of 29% underscores the extensive dissatisfaction expressed by testers. The app falls significantly short of meeting user expectations and providing a seamless and valuable website-building experience.
The overall impression of the app by our testers is quite negative. Weebly appears to have significant shortcomings across various aspects, making it a frustrating and unsatisfactory experience for users.
Unfortunately, based on the review data provided, it’s challenging to identify any notable strengths of the app. Testers seem to have encountered difficulties and limitations in almost every category.
The app suffers from several limitations that hinder its usability and user experience. It lacks intuitive navigation, efficient workflow, clarity in design, customization options, and functionality. The absence of quality support, transparent pricing, and value for money further adds to its limitations.
In conclusion, the app seems to be poorly designed, with a lack of essential features and an overall user-unfriendly experience. Testers frustrations extend to nearly all aspects of the app, including its design, functionality, customer support, and pricing structure. There is a clear need for significant improvements to address these issues and offer users a more satisfactory and effective website-building platform.