They have to spend a fortune on these things. Why are they always so bad?

Ford Motor Company. Trying to compare specs of various models. I'm pretty sure it's not possible. Maybe that's deliberate.

AT&T. Trying to upgrade my phone. Couldn't do it in Firefox and the chat guy said to try another browser. Can't do it there either. Looks like I'll have to go to the phone store tomorrow.

Don't get me started on government websites...

Amazon seems to be the only one that works consistently. Is there a reason for this? Ax - do you know?

The absolute worst has to be the site where I pay my water bill. I can tell by the wording what country it was done in. It is ghastly. And frequently down.

Sprint’s site frequently has links that just go in circles, and one stop is always “don’t you want to upgrade to a new phone?”

I forgot about General Electric and Siemens. Their sites are completely worthless.

Oh no, the worst is the Oregon Employment Department.

$85M and counting, with nothing to show for it

I think one problem with a lot of big company websites is the sheer volume of information that users may want to access. Years ago, many sites had a map that was a help in finding the portion of the site that might have the information being sought.

Now, many try to be helpful and intuitive, but that only goes so far and is very frustrating when you know what information you want, but can't find a path that leads to it.

I noticed Steve's mention of several companies I have occasion to deal with. For years, I found the Square D site the best for me because it had a direct link to sections and pages of their old paper catalog, organized exactly like the copy I used to keep at my desk.

The web has made a lot of information available that I used to have to call a manufacturer's representative to obtain and wait until it was mailed to me or sometimes hand delivered. The only problem is finding out where they hide it.

Big Al