TOC Websites - The Good, The Bad, And The Upgraded (FGW)

[87015]

The vast majority of passengers will just type in Waterloo, which it will bring up, rather than using the 3 letter codes :roll:

Type in Waterloo and the first result is Waterloo Merseyside...
If you are going to attempt to have a flashy website then some kind of ordering by likely use seems fairly sensible, google doesn't suggest words with 'wat' in the middle if thats what you start typing in.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Type in Waterloo and the first result is Waterloo Merseyside...

Out of 3 results, of which the other two are London Waterloo and London Waterloo East. I think even Karl Pilkington could get the hang of that one...

 

[All Line Rover]

In fairness, FGW have taken the quite good choice of structuring the search engine as every other is, and is searching for any stations containing the letters WAT. That is best for the majority of passengers who have no idea what the 3 letter codes are.

The "vast majority" of search engines? Are you sure about that? It's structured like every other (terribly designed) Thetrainline search engine, who do not operate every other search engine in existence.

And you say that this is "quite [a] good choice?" Just take a look at NRE or WebTIS search engines to see examples of great design. When WAT is entered, "London Waterloo" appears at the top of the list, with any other station beginning with "Wat" appearing below in alphabetical order.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

The "vast majority" of search engines? Are you sure about that? It's structured like every other (terribly designed) Thetrainline search engine, who do not operate every other search engine in existence.

Search engines search indexes on the basis of what is put into them. Engines like Google are very advanced, and take into account location, previous searches and whatnot. Other search engines carry out simple queries just on finding matches - which is what this one is doing. I agree the results could be weighted, but it's hardly the end of the world! It's still very easy for the average customer to find the station they want. I bet half of the average customers haven't even noticed the search engine changes!

 

[All Line Rover]

Out of 3 results, of which the other two are London Waterloo and London Waterloo East. I think even Karl Pilkington could get the hang of that one...

Ralph, the purpose of a well-designed search engine is to get customers the results they want as quickly as possible. You will be surprised how many people use the 3 letter code - especially for their local station - and even for those who do not, I think well over 90% of people who type "Waterloo" are looking for London Waterloo. I also can't think of anyone who would type "Wat" when looking for Canada Water, Fairwater, Greenhithe for Bluewater or Langwathby!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Search engines search indexes on the basis of what is put into them. Engines like Google are very advanced, and take into account location, previous searches and whatnot. Other search engines carry out simple queries just on finding matches - which is what this one is doing. I agree the results could be weighted, but it's hardly the end of the world! It's still very easy for the average customer to find the station they want. I bet half of the average customers haven't even noticed the search engine changes!

WebTIS has been around for years and works perfectly (almost). Thetrainline has been around for years, is terribly designed and has never been improved. Why FGW have chosen to go with Thetrainline (and this seemingly updated, even worse version of it) is beyond me.

Even minor annoyances (such as this one) can become extremely frustrating over time. I never use the Virgin Trains booking engine, for example, because it takes about 10 seconds longer than WebTIS every time I search! Minor details are important.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Ralph, the purpose of a well-designed search engine is to get customers the results they want as quickly as possible.

I'm well aware of what the purpose of a search engine is, thanks.

You will be surprised how many people use the 3 letter code

Somehow I don't think I will be. Tell you what, I'll ask a few commuters tomorrow at my local station whether they know what 3-letter codes are, and whether they know any of them. I bet you £10 not a single one will know.

I think well over 90% of people who type "Waterloo" are looking for London Waterloo.

And I think that 90% of people are well capable of reading 3 results and picking the most appropriate one. If you typed in 'Waterloo' and got a list of 367 of them then there is obviously a problem. That doesn't exist.

 

[jon0844]

In fairness, FGW have taken the quite good choice of structuring the search engine as every other is, and is searching for any stations containing the letters WAT. That is best for the majority of passengers who have no idea what the 3 letter codes are.

That is true, but aren't most TOCs now including the 3 letter codes on their timetables and route maps - to speed up checking of services via their mobile apps, SMS or Twitter?

Passengers are likely to be increasingly wanting to search by these codes, rather than finding stations that contain the letters in the name!

A good search would possibly do both - show stations containing the letters, but always show the one that matches the 3 letter code at the top. How hard would that be to do? Another thing would be to match 'Kings' and 'King's' with London King's Cross, even though it isn't the first word - as many people will skip the London bit.

 

[Schnellzug]

I wonder how many people, going off on a tangent slightly, even know that stations have three letter codes, let alone use them with any regularity? I wonder if it's only rail geeks that use them at every opportunity.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I wonder how many people, going off on a tangent slightly, even know that stations have three letter codes, let alone use them with any regularity? I wonder if it's only rail geeks that use them at every opportunity.

Exactly my point.

 

[All Line Rover]

Somehow I don't think I will be. Tell you what, I'll ask a few commuters tomorrow at my local station whether they know what 3-letter codes are, and whether they know any of them. I bet you £10 not a single one will know.


And I think that 90% of people are well capable of reading 3 results and picking the most appropriate one. If you typed in 'Waterloo' and got a list of 367 of them then there is obviously a problem. That doesn't exist.

Maybe so, but I'd appreciate you explaining why FGW's (aka Thetrainline's) implementation is so fantastic, and why WebTIS' implementation is so terrible (as WebTIS is doing the complete opposite to Thetrainline).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm well aware of what the purpose of a search engine is, thanks.

Well I'm sure you're aware of the features that a good search engine should include, then.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And I think that 90% of people are well capable of reading 3 results and picking the most appropriate one. If you typed in 'Waterloo' and got a list of 367 of them then there is obviously a problem. That doesn't exist.

And it takes 1 second to read those 3 results, doesn't it? As you can't just click "Find tickets," can you? And I'm sure you've seen those many, many press releases from Google about how every second counts.

I concede that NRE is just as bad as Thetrainline on this specific issue, but WebTIS still implements it perfectly.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I wonder how many people, going off on a tangent slightly, even know that stations have three letter codes, let alone use them with any regularity? I wonder if it's only rail geeks that use them at every opportunity.

People need to be educated - especially with the shift towards booking tickets online. Many people, even though they have an internet connection, are still "scared" of booking engines and will only buy their tickets at the station!

 

[Greenback]

Some people have concerns about how secure their payment details might be online, and refuse to buy anything using the internet.

Some people are confused by the booking engines and the bewildering array of fares available, and want human advice.

Some people just prefer tlaking to a human being.

It's not that people need educating. The rush towards doing everything online over the last decade has had numerous advantages for a lot of people, but we should not assume that it is conveneint or desirable for everyone to be encouraged to use this method of purchase.

I know the three letter codes for my local stations, but on many journeys to other areas I rely on using the station name. I hope I;m not going to be educated by being forced to remember every three letter code there is!

 

[All Line Rover]

It's not that people need educating. The rush towards doing everything online over the last decade has had numerous advantages for a lot of people, but we should not assume that it is conveneint or desirable for everyone to be encouraged to use this method of purchase.

I know the three letter codes for my local stations, but on many journeys to other areas I rely on using the station name. I hope I;m not going to be educated by being forced to remember every three letter code there is!

Of course not, and I'm not suggesting that this would be beneficial. I don't know every 3 letter code in the country, either!

But I struggle to see what it wrong with WebTIS' implementation of putting stations that match the 3 letter code at the top of the list, and putting all other stations that start with those three letters in alphabetical order.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Some people have concerns about how secure their payment details might be online, and refuse to buy anything using the internet.

Anyone who has this concern really does need educating. Providing you book through a legitimate website, the risk of your payment details being used fraudulently when shopping online is minuscule compared to the risks associated with using your credit/debit card in public.

 

[Schnellzug]

Some people have concerns about how secure their payment details might be online, and refuse to buy anything using the internet.

Some people are confused by the booking engines and the bewildering array of fares available, and want human advice.

Some people just prefer tlaking to a human being.

It's not that people need educating. The rush towards doing everything online over the last decade has had numerous advantages for a lot of people, but we should not assume that it is conveneint or desirable for everyone to be encouraged to use this method of purchase.

I know the three letter codes for my local stations, but on many journeys to other areas I rely on using the station name. I hope I;m not going to be educated by being forced to remember every three letter code there is!

That's very true; I indeed prefer (or would, if there were such things as Travel Centres anymore) to book anything involving advance bookings and reservations in person, rather than ploughing through pages of menus and typing in reams of Credit Card Details and all that. Online booking engines are useful for planning journies, but even then having a printed timetable in front of you, so you can see at a glance how often they run and so on rather than going up and down through menus, is still so much more convenient. With online search engines you get so many silly results like offerings of journies involving 3 changes taking 4 hours as well as direct journies taking an hour and a half, and so on, just because that's the next departure and you forgot to tick "direct trains only", and so on.

 

[All Line Rover]

I think a big concern many people have about online booking engines is that, if anything goes wrong (e.g. you accidentally enter the wrong date or click on the wrong train), you are to blame and there is nothing you can do about it (apart from buying a new ticket). Even I have this concern.

At least when you book in a Travel Centre, the member of staff is to blame if they enter anything incorrectly! (And they can rectify their error in just a few minutes - if not seconds - instead of having to spend ages on a premium rate phone line).

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Anyone who has this concern really does need educating. Providing you book through a legitimate website, the risk of your payment details being used fraudulently when shopping online is minuscule compared to the risks associated with using your credit/debit card in public.

Unfortunately it is not as simple as you make out. There are massive risks with paying online and these kinds of fraud trick thousands of people every year to the tune of £30bn. It's worryingly easy to fall into these traps, and usually, the kind of people who do are the people who think they are too clever to fall for them.

 

[richw]

Unfortunately it is not as simple as you make out. There are massive risks with paying online and these kinds of fraud trick thousands of people every year to the tune of £30bn. It's worryingly easy to fall into these traps, and usually, the kind of people who do are the people who think they are too clever to fall for them.

This is so true, I Google a legitimate company a while back, top Google link was infact a bogus website identical in style to the real website. The bogus then transacted a withdrawal of over a grand on my card in Glasgow, I've never been further north in my life past manchester!

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

 

[All Line Rover]

Unfortunately it is not as simple as you make out. There are massive risks with paying online and these kinds of fraud trick thousands of people every year to the tune of £30bn. It's worryingly easy to fall into these traps, and usually, the kind of people who do are the people who think they are too clever to fall for them.

I assume you mean me, then? :roll:

As usual, you are misinterpreting my post. Providing you buy from legitimate websites (and I hope you have noticed that important word in italics), the risks are minimal.

The problem comes when the uninformed - or people who are too trusting - fall for scams (which, to be quite honest, has nothing to do with train tickets, but you feel the need to complain about it...) - namely, the elderly, people who are unfamiliar with the internet, and people who aren't suspicious enough!

Your point is completely valid (although I don't see much relevance to booking tickets online, and why you are implying that it applies to me), and I'm not claiming to have an answer for it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This is so true, I Google a legitimate company a while back, top Google link was infact a bogus website identical in style to the real website. The bogus then transacted a withdrawal of over a grand on my card in Glasgow, I've never been further north in my life past manchester!

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

I sympathise with your predicament, but I have to point out that - had you visited an encrypted page on the legitimate website previously (most likely the payment page) - any modern, main-stream web browser would, as soon as you visit an encrypted page, inform you that you have never visited this "new" website before, so you can immediately tell that it is fraudulent. This would only happen if you visited an encrypted page, of course - again, most likely the payment page - but if you get to a stage where you are being asked to enter personal details and the page is not encrypted, you can again tell that you are on a fraudulent website!

Yes, I know that you always need to use the same browser (to retain the cookies) but it is bad practise to enter your personal details on any computer other than your own.

 

[richw]

I'd never used the company website before, was on my own laptop, I was tired and in a rush to order what I wanted as had 5 mins to place the order before delivery cut off to get delivery in time for when i needed the item (a party on the Saturday night)

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

 

[All Line Rover]

I'd never used the company website before, was on my own laptop, I was tired and in a rush to order what I wanted as had 5 mins to place the order before delivery cut off to get delivery in time for when i needed the item (a party on the Saturday night)

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

Mmm... all the hallmarks of leading up to a scam. It's never a good idea to rush when ordering online - especially if it is your first time on a certain website.

I have just noticed some more "bad practise" in your post, which is that you shouldn't Google a website you are going to purchase something from! Always enter the web address directly - you reduce the risk of being redirected to a fraudulent website.

 

[richw]

But I didn't know the actual website...on looking at my history the website I used had a .com instead of a .co.UK and that was only difference in url

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

 

[Max]

Mmm... all the hallmarks of leading up to a scam. It's never a good idea to rush when ordering online - especially if it is your first time on a certain website.

I have just noticed some more "bad practise" in your post, which is that you shouldn't Google a website you are going to purchase something from! Always enter the web address directly - you reduce the risk of being redirected to a fraudulent website.

You seem to be quite the expert on these matters! But I doubt everybody has such a strong 'code of conduct' when using the internet and it can be very easy to get caught out. As for not Googling an online store, this seems a little extreme to say the least.

 

[All Line Rover]

You seem to be quite the expert on these matters! But I doubt everybody has such a strong 'code of conduct' when using the internet and it can be very easy to get caught out. As for not Googling an online store, this seems a little extreme to say the least.

It is VERY important not to Google websites that require financial details - it is not extreme at all.

This has become particularly apparent in the past year or two when the websites of a number of high street banks were hacked. Each time, the Google link redirected to a fraudulent website - just think of the consequences for Google lovers! hock:

For the record, I don't disagree with you that it can be easy to get caught out, but at the same time, people must be educated about taking the needed precautions. In the real world, covering your hand when using a Chip and Pin pad could be seen to be just as extreme!

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But I didn't know the actual website...on looking at my history the website I used had a .com instead of a .co.UK and that was only difference in url

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

And that small, seemingly minor difference meant giving your details to con artists. These fraudsters have certainly perfected their art, although because I'm so suspicious I always check these things each and every time I purchase something!

 

[Max]

It is VERY important not to Google websites that require financial details - it is not extreme at all.

This has become particularly apparent in the past year or two when the websites of a number of high street banks were hacked. Each time, the Google link redirected to a fraudulent website - just think of the consequences for Google lovers! hock:

I would never Google my bank's website because I know the URL. But what if I was searching for an online shop? Obviously I would exercise caution if it was a site I hadn't used before, but not purchasing because I've found them on Google? I'd hardly call that realistic.

 

[richw]

Lloyds refunded me all the fraudulently taken money within a week, blocked my cards immediately. Was little more than a major inconvenience.


Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

 

[All Line Rover]

I would never Google my bank's website because I know the URL. But what if I was searching for an online shop? Obviously I would exercise caution if it was a site I hadn't used before, but not purchasing because I've found them on Google? I'd hardly call that realistic.

I personally would search for the company on other websites - read the reviews, and make sure that the web address matches up. But that's just me!


--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Lloyds refunded me all the fraudulently taken money within a week, blocked my cards immediately. Was little more than a major inconvenience.


Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

And so they should.

 

[SS4]

It is VERY important not to Google websites that require financial details - it is not extreme at all.

No, it is very important not to click through on links to websites not simply to google them.

Cases of fraud are rare compared to the flood of ones that pass off without a hitch. We just hear about them because they are more newsworthy.
How many single men aged 18-24 feature in news reports about fraud compared to married pensioners?

 

[bb21]

Somehow I don't think I will be. Tell you what, I'll ask a few commuters tomorrow at my local station whether they know what 3-letter codes are, and whether they know any of them. I bet you £10 not a single one will know.

And I think that 90% of people are well capable of reading 3 results and picking the most appropriate one. If you typed in 'Waterloo' and got a list of 367 of them then there is obviously a problem. That doesn't exist.

The only thing is that it takes time to read from the options if the list does not by default return matching codes at the top of the list. In cases where time is not an issue, whichever method is implemented is hardly going to matter. However in situations where a speedy enquiry process is required, not having such a feature can cause annoyance and will mean potentially losing the customs of people who are familiar with three-letter codes. It might not be a massive proportion, however a mere 1% of the population of this country will mean 600,000 potential customers lost.

The mechanism costs little to implement, yet can have big rewards. Not paying attention to details like these does show up how rushed the website went live and what a botched job it is, when it has become common standard elsewhere.

Unfortunately it is not as simple as you make out. There are massive risks with paying online and these kinds of fraud trick thousands of people every year to the tune of £30bn. It's worryingly easy to fall into these traps, and usually, the kind of people who do are the people who think they are too clever to fall for them.

Yes, I agree with you totally on that. A real question for the majority of people who are scared of giving out their bank details online is not whether the trustworthy website they're using is secure enough, but rather whether the website is trustworthy.

 

[cointreau_rove]

Hate the FGW revised upgraded or as I think "messed up" website.

the mobile version of the Nataionalrail website is another example of a complete mess

Gone are the options to see the platforms and arrival or departue times and to play with routes to find whether there are alternate trains arriving (say) at Reading. I want the old one back! I was recently able to plot my trip back from Derby to Britsol Temple Meads while work on a sunday was being carried out at Bristol Parkway. I was able to track the 11:27 departure from Birmingham against a late running service that would tale us through to Newport as was being advised and indeed made the later running but earlier arrival service that rerouted around Bristol Parkway and got me into Temple Meads 30 minutes before the train swap at Newport off the Voyager, change of platfrm and onto the Cardiff service to Portsmouth. Instaed I got the 10 Car Mk3 stock 2/3rd empty service to Plymouth. No changes and interesting re-route. This was by my being able to track the 2 services on the Nationalrail mobile site...can't do it anymore


I was able to meet the airport service and comfortably get my flight from Bristol Airport - no stress, time for a pint at the departures area and early enough to get through security .... gone - suppose I will have to buy the super Android app for my Galaxy SII phone.


As said before - if it ain't broke don't fox it.

C

 

[pmgarvey]

suppose I will have to buy the super Android app for my Galaxy SII phone.

It's worth it, the app seems easier to get info from than the full fledged website.

 

[Schnellzug]

I would never Google my bank's website because I know the URL. But what if I was searching for an online shop? Obviously I would exercise caution if it was a site I hadn't used before, but not purchasing because I've found them on Google? I'd hardly call that realistic.

Yes, for instance, I was trying to look up South West trains website. Now, was it swtrains.co.uk?, southwesttrains.co.uk?, or what? Now, it really is so much easier to look it up on a Search engine than trying all sorts of permutations in the hope of hitting on the right one eventually.